Courseiva

CCNA Threat Hunting And Detection Questions

38 questions · Threat Hunting And Detection topic · All types, answers revealed

1
MCQeasy

A threat hunter wants to identify unauthorized DNS tunneling. Which data point is most indicative of this activity?

A.Low volume of DNS failures
B.High volume of A record queries
C.Frequent SRV record updates
D.High volume of TXT record queries
AnswerD

DNS tunnelling exfiltrates data by encoding it in DNS queries, commonly abusing TXT records because they carry larger payloads. A high volume of TXT queries to unusual domains therefore signals tunnelling far more strongly than ordinary A or PTR lookups.

Why this answer

DNS tunneling exfiltrates data or establishes C2 by encoding payloads in DNS query names and responses, most commonly using TXT records because they can carry arbitrary text up to 255 characters per string and are rarely queried in bulk during normal operations. A high volume of TXT record queries — especially to a single domain or with long, encoded subdomains — is a strong indicator of tunneling tools like iodine, dnscat2, or DNSExfiltrator.

Exam trap

312-85 often tests the assumption that any high DNS volume indicates tunneling — the trap is failing to recognize that TXT records, not A records, are the specific indicator because of their payload capacity and rarity in normal traffic.

How to eliminate wrong answers

Option A is wrong because a low volume of DNS failures is normal baseline behavior and does not indicate tunneling; in fact, tunneling often produces successful responses, not failures. Option B is wrong because high volumes of A record queries are typical of normal web browsing and CDN resolution, making them a poor discriminator for malicious activity. Option C is wrong because SRV record updates are associated with service discovery (e.g., Active Directory, SIP) and are not a primary tunneling vector — SRV records are not designed to carry arbitrary payloads.

2
MCQmedium

A threat hunter is reviewing PowerShell operational logs collected via Windows Event Forwarding and notices Event ID 4104 entries that contain a script block defining a function which, when invoked, calls System.Net.WebClient.DownloadString with a hard-coded IP address and then passes the returned content to Invoke-Expression. The parent process is winword.exe. Which hunting conclusion is most defensible?

A.The event should be ignored because Event ID 4104 only records the script's file path and never the actual code that ran.
B.The script block logging captured a defensible indicator of a macro-driven download-and-execute chain that warrants escalation and endpoint containment.
C.The event proves a remote code execution vulnerability in Word was exploited, because winword.exe parentage always indicates memory corruption exploitation.
D.The event is benign because Script Block Logging only fires for scripts run through the PowerShell ISE, and Word cannot launch the ISE in this manner.
AnswerB

Script Block Logging (Event ID 4104) records the de-obfuscated script text even when the command line was obfuscated, so seeing DownloadString piped into Invoke-Expression with a hard-coded IP under a winword.exe parent is a strong, evidence-backed indicator of macro-based stager execution. The hunter has the actual code, the network destination, and the initiating parent, which together justify escalation rather than dismissal as benign administration.

Why this answer

The combination of de-obfuscated script block content, a download cradle using System.Net.WebClient, execution through Invoke-Expression, a hard-coded IP, and Office parentage forms a coherent attack chain that a hunter can defend. Escalation is warranted because the telemetry captures both intent and mechanism.

Exam trap

The trap here is assuming Script Block Logging is scoped to the PowerShell console or ISE, when in fact it captures blocks from any host that loads the PowerShell engine, including Office.

3
MCQeasy

A threat hunter is asked to determine whether a suspected intrusion involved beaconing over HTTPS to an external command-and-control server. The organization has full network metadata but no TLS interception. Which hunting approach is most appropriate to identify beaconing behavior without decrypting traffic?

A.Correlate HTTP response codes from the external server with the internal host's DNS cache entries.
B.Decode the TLS certificate chain presented by each external server to read the encrypted application data.
C.Analyze connection periodicity, duration, and byte-count symmetry for repeated sessions to the same external destination.
D.Inspect the Server Name Indication field to recover the plaintext contents of each HTTPS request.
AnswerC

Beaconing produces repeated connections at regular intervals with similar session durations and roughly symmetric or consistently sized payloads. These metadata patterns remain visible without decryption and can be baselined per host. Periodicity combined with destination reputation and payload size consistency is the standard method for finding C2 beacons in encrypted traffic.

Why this answer

Without TLS interception, beaconing is best detected through traffic metadata: regular connection intervals, consistent session durations, and stable payload sizes to the same external destination. SNI, certificates, and DNS cache entries reveal naming and authentication details but not application data, and encrypted HTTP response codes are not observable, so metadata periodicity analysis is the appropriate method.

Exam trap

The trap here is assuming SNI or certificate inspection can substitute for decryption, when both expose only handshake metadata and never the encrypted beacon payload.

4
Multi-Selectmedium

Which TWO artifacts are most important when investigating a possible 'Fileless Malware' infection?

Select 2 answers
A.PowerShell Script Block Logging
B.WMI Repository contents
C.File System MFT records
D.Browser Cache History
E.Windows Update logs
AnswersA, B

PowerShell Script Block Logging records the actual script content executed in memory, which is essential because fileless malware leaves no executable on disk. It captures the malicious commands attackers run through PowerShell, providing the primary forensic evidence for such infections.

Why this answer

PowerShell Script Block Logging (Option A) is critical because fileless malware frequently executes malicious code through PowerShell without writing a payload to disk, and Script Block Logging (Event ID 4104) captures the full de-obfuscated script content that defenders need for detection and analysis. WMI Repository contents (Option B) are equally important because fileless attacks commonly abuse WMI for persistence and execution via event subscriptions and __EventFilter/CommandLineEventConsumer classes stored in the repository, which leaves no traditional executable on disk. In contrast, File System MFT records (Option C) mainly track file creation and metadata, which is largely irrelevant when the attack avoids dropping files, and Browser Cache History (Option D) only reflects web browsing artifacts unrelated to in-memory or WMI-based execution.

Windows Update logs (Option E) record patching activity and have no bearing on detecting fileless malware techniques.

Exam trap

The trap here is that candidates may gravitate toward familiar forensic artifacts like the MFT or browser history, assuming they always contain evidence, but fileless malware specifically avoids disk writes, making memory and system tool logs the key sources.

5
Multi-Selectmedium

Which TWO command-line parameters are highly suspicious when observed with 'powershell.exe' in your telemetry?

Select 2 answers
A.-WindowStyle Hidden
B.-EncodedCommand
C.-File
D.-InputFormat
E.-Version
AnswersA, B

-WindowStyle Hidden suppresses the PowerShell console window, a technique attackers use to conceal malicious execution from the logged-in user. Legitimate administrative scripts rarely need to hide their window, making this parameter a strong indicator of suspicious activity in telemetry.

Why this answer

Option A, -WindowStyle Hidden, is highly suspicious because it deliberately conceals the PowerShell console window from the user, a common technique in malware and post-exploitation frameworks to hide malicious activity from the victim. Option B, -EncodedCommand, is highly suspicious because it accepts a Base64-encoded command string, which attackers use to obfuscate payloads and evade simple string-based detection in command-line telemetry. In contrast, -File (C) is a normal parameter for executing a script file and is routinely used in legitimate administration, -InputFormat (D) merely specifies the input format (e.g., XML or text) for commands and is benign, and -Version (E) only selects which PowerShell engine version to run and carries no inherent malicious intent.

Exam trap

312-85 often tests which PowerShell parameters are inherently suspicious versus benign, so candidates flag common parameters like -File or -Version that are used in legitimate administration.

6
MCQmedium

Which tool is most effective for visualizing the parent-child process relationships during a threat hunt?

A.Resource Monitor
B.Process Explorer
C.PowerShell ISE
D.Wireshark
AnswerB

Process Explorer displays running processes in a hierarchical tree, showing each process's parent and children, which directly reveals process lineage during a hunt. This parent-child visualisation exposes suspicious spawning relationships that flat process listings or network-focused tools cannot show.

Why this answer

Process Explorer is the Sysinternals tool that displays a hierarchical tree of processes showing parent-child relationships, which is exactly what is needed to visualize how processes spawned during a threat hunt. It shows the process tree, command lines, and parent PIDs, making it ideal for spotting suspicious process ancestry like a Word document spawning PowerShell. This directly supports identifying malicious process chains.

Exam trap

312-85 often tests tool-to-purpose mapping, so candidates confuse Resource Monitor's resource view with Process Explorer's process-tree view and pick the wrong visualization tool.

How to eliminate wrong answers

Option A is wrong because Resource Monitor shows resource usage (CPU, disk, network) per process but does not present a parent-child process tree for ancestry analysis. Option C is wrong because PowerShell ISE is a scripting environment, not a process-visualization tool, and does not display process lineage. Option D is wrong because Wireshark is a network protocol analyzer that captures packets and has no visibility into local process parent-child relationships.

7
MCQeasy

A threat hunter wants to detect adversary use of scheduled tasks for persistence on Windows endpoints and has Sysmon deployed with a configuration that includes process creation and file creation events. Which approach gives the most direct and reliable detection coverage for newly created scheduled tasks?

A.Monitor Sysmon Event ID 1 for schtasks.exe process creation with create arguments and correlate the resulting task file creation in the Windows Tasks directory.
B.Monitor Sysmon Event ID 7 for image loads by svchost.exe from non-standard directories.
C.Monitor Sysmon Event ID 12 and 13 for registry modifications to the Run key under HKCU.
D.Monitor Sysmon Event ID 3 for network connections from taskeng.exe to external addresses.
AnswerA

Scheduled task creation leaves two complementary traces: the schtasks.exe command line and the task definition file written under the Tasks directory. Correlating process creation with the subsequent file creation ties the actor to the artifact and enables detection even when the command line uses unusual arguments. This pairing gives the hunter both the mechanism and the persistence artifact, which is the most direct coverage available with the deployed configuration.

Why this answer

Correlating schtasks.exe process creation with the task definition file written under the Windows Tasks directory captures both the act of creating persistence and the resulting artifact. This dual-signal approach is more reliable than any single event type and matches the telemetry the hunter already has enabled.

Exam trap

The trap here is assuming that any Sysmon event touching taskeng.exe or taskhostw.exe detects scheduled task creation, when those processes execute existing tasks rather than create new ones.

8
MCQmedium

During an investigation, you observe suspicious PowerShell execution with the -EncodedCommand flag. Which log provider should you consult to see the decoded script block content?

A.System Event ID 7040
B.Microsoft-Windows-PowerShell/Operational ID 4104
C.Application Event ID 1000
D.Security Event ID 4688
AnswerB

Event ID 4104 in the Microsoft-Windows-PowerShell/Operational log records script block logging, capturing the de-obfuscated script text after PowerShell decodes the Base64 -EncodedCommand payload. The engine log (400/800) only shows the encoded string, so 4104 is the provider that reveals actual content.

Why this answer

The Microsoft-Windows-PowerShell/Operational log (Event ID 4104) captures the full script block text, even if obfuscated or encoded.

9
MCQmedium

You are hunting for unauthorized scheduled tasks. Which PowerShell cmdlet allows you to audit these tasks remotely across the enterprise?

A.Get-ScheduledTask
B.Get-Service
C.Get-Process
D.Get-WmiObject Win32_StartupCommand
AnswerA

Get-ScheduledTask queries the Task Scheduler service and, combined with the -CimSession parameter, enumerates scheduled tasks on remote hosts, enabling enterprise-wide auditing for unauthorised entries. It returns task definitions including actions and triggers, exposing persistence mechanisms hidden in the scheduler.

Why this answer

Get-ScheduledTask is the PowerShell cmdlet that retrieves scheduled tasks from the local or remote computer. It allows auditors and threat hunters to enumerate scheduled tasks across the enterprise, which is critical for detecting persistence mechanisms. It can be combined with Invoke-Command or CIM sessions for remote auditing.

Exam trap

The trap is mixing up cmdlets for different persistence mechanisms; candidates may choose Get-WmiObject Win32_StartupCommand thinking it covers scheduled tasks, but it only covers startup commands.

How to eliminate wrong answers

Option B is wrong because Get-Service lists Windows services, not scheduled tasks; while services can be used for persistence, they are a different mechanism. Option C is wrong because Get-Process lists running processes, which does not directly reveal scheduled tasks. Option D is wrong because Get-WmiObject Win32_StartupCommand retrieves startup commands from the registry and startup folders, not scheduled tasks; it is useful for startup persistence but not task scheduler auditing.

10
MCQeasy

An analyst is hunting for unauthorized network connections. Which port is commonly associated with SMB, frequently used for lateral movement (e.g., PSExec)?

A.Port 80
B.Port 3389
C.Port 445
D.Port 22
AnswerC

Port 445 carries SMB directly over TCP, the channel PSExec and similar tools abuse for remote service creation and lateral movement. Monitoring 445 for anomalous internal connections exposes unauthorised admin shares and credential relay activity.

Why this answer

Port 445 is the standard TCP port for SMB (Server Message Block) over TCP, used for file sharing, named pipes, and remote administration. Attackers commonly abuse SMB via tools like PSExec, which uses SMB to copy and execute binaries on remote hosts, making port 445 a primary vector for lateral movement and ransomware propagation (e.g., WannaCry, NotPetya).

Exam trap

312-85 often tests port-to-protocol mapping, and the trap is confusing RDP (3389) with SMB (445) since both enable remote access and lateral movement — but only 445 is SMB and PSExec-related.

How to eliminate wrong answers

Option A is wrong because port 80 is HTTP for web traffic and is not associated with SMB or PSExec lateral movement. Option B is wrong because port 3389 is RDP (Remote Desktop Protocol) — while also used for lateral movement, it is not SMB and does not support PSExec's SMB-based execution. Option D is wrong because port 22 is SSH, used for secure remote shell access on Linux/Unix systems, not SMB or PSExec.

11
MCQeasy

Which hunting methodology involves starting with a known adversary tactic and working backward to identify evidence in your logs?

A.Hypothesis-driven hunting
B.Incident response forensics
C.Machine learning-based hunting
D.Alert-driven hunting
AnswerA

Hypothesis-driven hunting begins with a known adversary tactic, technique or procedure, then forms a testable hypothesis and searches logs for matching evidence. This satisfies the stem's requirement of starting from the tactic and working backward, unlike data-driven or intelligence-driven approaches that begin with anomalies or feeds.

Why this answer

Hypothesis-driven hunting starts with a specific, testable proposition about adversary behavior — typically derived from a known TTP, threat intel report, or ATT&CK technique — and then searches telemetry for evidence that confirms or refutes it. Because the hypothesis is anchored to a known adversary tactic, the analyst works backward from the tactic to the artifacts it would leave in logs (e.g., process creation, registry writes, network connections). This structured, deductive approach is the defining characteristic of hypothesis-driven threat hunting.

Exam trap

The trap here is confusing proactive, hypothesis-led hunting with reactive alert- or incident-driven workflows; candidates often pick 'alert-driven' because it sounds structured, but the question's phrase 'starting with a known adversary tactic' is the tell for hypothesis-driven hunting.

How to eliminate wrong answers

Option B is wrong because incident response forensics is reactive — it begins after a confirmed or suspected incident and focuses on scoping, containment, and root-cause analysis, not proactive hypothesis testing. Option C is wrong because machine learning-based hunting relies on anomaly detection and statistical baselines to surface outliers, which is inductive rather than starting from a known adversary tactic. Option D is wrong because alert-driven hunting is triggered by existing detections or SIEM alerts, making it reactive to what tooling already flags rather than driven by an analyst-formulated hypothesis.

12
MCQhard

A threat hunter is examining network flow data to detect potential lateral movement using the SMB protocol. The hunter notices a series of connections from a single workstation to multiple servers on port 445, each followed by a short-lived session. Which analysis technique would best help identify this as malicious lateral movement?

A.Inspect the SMB dialect negotiated in each session and flag sessions using SMBv1, as it is inherently malicious.
B.Monitor for SMB sessions that transfer files with extensions like .exe or .dll, as these are always malicious.
C.Use frequency analysis to identify workstations connecting to an unusually high number of distinct servers on port 445 within a short time window.
D.Calculate the average bytes per second for each SMB session and flag sessions with unusually high throughput.
AnswerC

Lateral movement via SMB often involves a compromised host connecting to many servers in a short period, attempting to spread. Frequency analysis of distinct destination IPs per source on port 445 can reveal this pattern. The short-lived sessions suggest automated scanning or exploitation, making this technique effective for detecting such behavior.

Why this answer

Lateral movement using SMB often manifests as a single source connecting to many destinations on port 445 in a short time, indicative of scanning or spreading. Frequency analysis of destination IPs per source can highlight such anomalous patterns. Other techniques like throughput analysis or dialect inspection may not capture the breadth of connections that signal lateral movement.

Exam trap

The trap here is focusing on volume or protocol version instead of the pattern of connections to multiple hosts, which is the key indicator of lateral movement.

13
MCQeasy

A threat hunter wants to detect adversaries abusing the Windows Management Instrumentation command-line utility to execute code on remote hosts during a hunt for lateral movement. Which artifact should the hunter prioritize to identify the remote execution attempt on the target machine?

A.Windows Security Event ID 5156 records showing inbound connections to TCP port 135 on the target host.
B.Windows Security Event ID 4703 records showing token privilege adjustments on the target host.
C.Windows Security Event ID 4624 logon records showing Logon Type 10 on the target host.
D.Windows Security Event ID 4688 process creation records showing wmiprvse.exe spawning a child process such as cmd.exe or powershell.exe.
AnswerD

Remote WMI execution runs through the WMI provider host, wmiprvse.exe, which spawns the attacker's command as a child process on the target. Seeing wmiprvse.exe as the parent of a shell or scripting engine is a strong, direct indicator of remote code execution via WMI and is available through process creation auditing.

Why this answer

The most direct artifact of remote WMI code execution is the WMI provider host spawning an unexpected child process on the target. Process creation auditing that captures parent image and command line lets the hunter see wmiprvse.exe launching shells or scripting engines, which is difficult to explain as benign. Network-level RPC or logon events are supporting context but do not demonstrate execution.

Exam trap

The trap here is chasing the network connection to the RPC port as proof of compromise, when connection setup is normal and only the resulting process lineage proves code execution.

14
MCQmedium

A threat hunter is examining Sysmon telemetry on a workstation and sees an svchost.exe process whose image path is C:\Users\Public\svchost.exe, whose parent is explorer.exe, and which has an unsigned binary with no version information. Which hunting assessment is most appropriate?

A.The process is a legitimate third-party application because explorer.exe is the standard parent for all user-launched programs.
B.The process is likely a masquerading binary executing from an unusual path with a user-mode parent, and the hunter should triage it as a probable malicious implant.
C.The process indicates a Windows service misconfiguration that requires only a registry repair on the host.
D.This is a benign service host because svchost.exe is a legitimate Windows component and its presence alone is not suspicious.
AnswerB

Legitimate svchost.exe lives in System32, is digitally signed by Microsoft, and is spawned by services.exe. An unsigned copy without version information running from C:\Users\Public with explorer.exe as parent violates all three of those invariants simultaneously, which is a strong masquerading signal. Escalating for memory acquisition, hash lookup, and network correlation is the defensible next step rather than assuming a benign anomaly.

Why this answer

Legitimate svchost.exe must run from System32, carry a Microsoft signature, and be parented by services.exe. A signed-absent copy in a user-writable directory with explorer.exe as parent violates all three invariants, making masquerading the strongest hypothesis and warranting immediate triage.

Exam trap

The trap here is trusting a familiar process name and ignoring that image path, signature status, and parent process are the properties that actually establish legitimacy.

15
MCQmedium

A threat hunter is reviewing Sysmon logs to detect potential credential dumping via LSASS memory access. Which Sysmon Event ID should the hunter prioritize to identify suspicious access to the lsass.exe process?

A.Event ID 10 (ProcessAccess)
B.Event ID 7 (Image Loaded)
C.Event ID 1 (Process Creation)
D.Event ID 8 (CreateRemoteThread)
AnswerA

Sysmon Event ID 10 logs process access events, including the source image, target image, and granted access rights. When a process accesses lsass.exe with access rights like 0x1010 or 0x1410, it strongly indicates credential dumping tools such as Mimikatz. This event provides the necessary telemetry to detect unauthorized memory reads of LSASS, making it the correct choice for this hunt.

Why this answer

Sysmon Event ID 10 (ProcessAccess) captures detailed information about processes opening handles to other processes, including the target lsass.exe and the requested access rights. Credential dumping tools like Mimikatz typically request access rights such as 0x1010 or 0x1410 to read LSASS memory. By monitoring Event ID 10 for suspicious access to lsass.exe, hunters can detect credential dumping attempts in real time.

Exam trap

The trap here is confusing process creation events with process access events, assuming that credential dumping will always appear as a new process launch rather than a memory access operation.

16
Multi-Selecthard

A threat hunter is investigating a suspected data exfiltration over HTTPS. The hunter has full network traffic capture and wants to identify potential exfiltration channels. Which two characteristics are most indicative of malicious exfiltration over HTTPS? (Choose two.)

Select 2 answers
A.HTTPS traffic using a self-signed certificate from an internal server.
B.Periodic small outbound connections to the same external IP address at regular intervals.
C.Sessions using TLS 1.2 with perfect forward secrecy ciphers.
D.Outbound HTTPS traffic to a domain that was registered recently and has no prior reputation.
E.Large outbound data transfers to a previously unseen external IP address during non-business hours.
AnswersD, E

Domains registered recently with no reputation are often used for malicious purposes, including exfiltration. Attackers frequently use new domains to avoid blocklists. Outbound traffic to such a domain, especially combined with other factors like data volume, is highly suspicious and indicative of exfiltration.

Why this answer

Large outbound transfers to new external IPs during off-hours and traffic to recently registered domains with no reputation are both strong indicators of data exfiltration. These characteristics reflect common attacker behaviors: exfiltrating data to infrastructure they control and avoiding detection by using new domains. Other options like secure cipher suites or self-signed certificates are not inherently malicious.

Exam trap

The trap here is assuming that secure TLS configurations or self-signed certificates are indicators of malicious activity, when in fact they are common in legitimate traffic.

17
MCQhard

You are hunting for Cobalt Strike C2 using JA3/JA3S fingerprinting. If the JA3S value is unique for your environment and observed across multiple hosts, what does this suggest?

A.The connection is encrypted with an expired certificate
B.The client has been compromised
C.It indicates a specific C2 listener implementation
D.It is a standard browser connection
AnswerC

A JA3S fingerprint is the server-side TLS hello hash. A value unique to your environment and recurring across multiple hosts indicates one distinct server implementation, consistent with a specific C2 listener such as Cobalt Strike, rather than legitimate shared infrastructure.

Why this answer

JA3S is the server-side TLS fingerprint derived from the ServerHello (TLS version, cipher suite, extensions). A JA3S value that is unique in the environment and appears across multiple hosts strongly indicates a specific C2 listener implementation — for example, a particular Cobalt Strike malleable profile or team server build — because legitimate servers usually share fingerprints with many peers.

Exam trap

312-85 often tests the confusion between JA3 (client fingerprint) and JA3S (server fingerprint), leading candidates to pick 'client compromised' when the question is about the server-side listener.

How to eliminate wrong answers

Option A is wrong because certificate expiry is not encoded in JA3S; JA3S is computed from the ServerHello fields, not the certificate. Option B is wrong because JA3S identifies the server side of the TLS handshake, so it does not directly prove the client is compromised — it identifies the listener the clients are talking to. Option D is wrong because a standard browser connection would produce a common, widely shared JA3S, not a unique one.

18
Multi-Selectmedium

Which TWO log sources are most essential when hunting for adversary use of living-off-the-land binaries (LotL)?

Select 2 answers
A.Sysmon Event ID 1
B.System Event Log (Event ID 7045)
C.DHCP Server logs
D.DNS Query logs
E.Security Event Log (Event ID 4688)
AnswersA, E

Sysmon Event ID 1 records process creation with full command-line arguments and parent process details, exposing LotL abuse such as renamed system binaries or suspicious PowerShell invocations. This process-level telemetry satisfies the requirement to hunt adversary misuse of legitimate built-in tools.

Why this answer

Sysmon Event ID 1 (Process Create) is essential because it captures detailed process creation telemetry including the full command line, parent process, image path, hashes, and user context, which is exactly what is needed to spot legitimate Windows binaries like powershell.exe, rundll32.exe, or certutil.exe being abused for LotL activity. Security Event ID 4688 (A New Process Has Been Created) is also essential because it records process creation with the new process name, creator process, and — when command-line auditing is enabled — the full command line, providing native Windows visibility into LotL binary execution even without Sysmon deployed. Together these two process-creation sources give the command-line and parent-child process context that LotL hunting fundamentally depends on.

System Event Log Event ID 7045 only shows service installation and would miss the vast majority of LotL execution that does not install a service. DHCP Server logs only record IP lease assignments and offer no process or command-line visibility. DNS Query logs can reveal malicious domains but do not show which binary or command line made the query, so they are supporting rather than essential for identifying LotL binary abuse.

Exam trap

The trap is selecting service installation (7045) or DNS logs as primary LotL sources; candidates must recognize that LotL detection hinges on process creation telemetry (Sysmon 1 and Security 4688) because the attack abuses legitimate executables.

19
MCQhard

During a threat hunt for Kerberoasting, an analyst reviews Windows Security event logs and notices Event ID 4769 (Kerberos service ticket request) entries with RC4 encryption (0x17) for multiple service principal names from a single user account within a short window. Which additional context is most important to confirm malicious intent rather than benign service access?

A.The service accounts associated with the requested SPNs have passwords longer than 25 characters.
B.The Kerberos ticket lifetime for the requested service tickets is set to the domain default of ten hours.
C.The requesting account is a standard user who does not normally access those services, and the requests occur outside normal business hours.
D.The domain controller that issued the tickets is the primary domain controller emulator.
AnswerC

Kerberoasting abuses any authenticated user's ability to request service tickets, so the strongest signal is a low-privilege account suddenly requesting RC4 tickets for many SPNs it has no business need for, especially at unusual times. This behavioral deviation distinguishes attacker enumeration from routine service access by authorized accounts during working hours.

Why this answer

Kerberoasting is possible for any authenticated user, so the reliable signal is behavioral: a low-privilege account requesting RC4 service tickets for many SPNs it never uses, often at odd hours. Target password length, responding DC identity, and default ticket lifetimes are normal environmental facts that do not distinguish abuse from routine Kerberos service access.

Exam trap

The trap here is treating the RC4 encryption type alone as proof of Kerberoasting, when RC4 service ticket requests also occur legitimately and only the requester's abnormal behavior confirms abuse.

20
MCQhard

While hunting for living-off-the-land (LotL) binaries, you identify suspicious use of 'certutil.exe'. What is the most likely malicious purpose for this utility?

A.Downloading remote payloads
B.Extracting browser passwords
C.Clearing event logs
D.Modifying system registry keys
AnswerA

certutil.exe includes URL cache and decode switches that fetch remote files and write them to disk, letting attackers download payloads using a signed Microsoft binary. This living-off-the-land abuse evades application allowlisting that blocks standalone download tools.

Why this answer

certutil.exe is a legitimate Windows utility for managing certificates, but attackers abuse its -urlcache and -split flags to download files from remote URLs, effectively turning it into a LOLBin downloader. This allows payload retrieval without introducing custom malware, evading application whitelisting.

Exam trap

312-85 often tests LOLBin misuse — candidates confuse certutil's download capability with credential theft or log clearing, which are performed by different utilities.

How to eliminate wrong answers

Option B is wrong because extracting browser passwords is typically done with tools like Mimikatz or browser-specific credential dumpers, not certutil. Option C is wrong because clearing event logs is done with wevtutil or PowerShell Clear-EventLog, not certutil. Option D is wrong because modifying registry keys is done with reg.exe or PowerShell, not certutil.

21
MCQmedium

A threat hunter is analyzing Windows event logs to detect an adversary using scheduled tasks for persistence. The hunter wants to identify tasks created with a hidden setting. Which event ID and field should the hunter focus on?

A.Event ID 4702 (A scheduled task was updated) and the 'TaskName' field containing suspicious strings.
B.Event ID 4698 (A scheduled task was created) and the 'Hidden' element in the task XML.
C.Event ID 4688 (A new process has been created) and the 'ParentProcessName' field showing 'schtasks.exe'.
D.Event ID 106 (Task Scheduler operational log) and the 'TaskScheduler' provider.
AnswerB

Event ID 4698 logs the creation of a scheduled task and includes the task's XML definition. The XML may contain a <Hidden>true</Hidden> setting, which indicates the task is hidden from the default view in Task Scheduler. Attackers often use this to conceal persistence. Focusing on this event and field directly addresses the scenario.

Why this answer

Windows Security Event ID 4698 records the creation of scheduled tasks and includes the full XML definition. The <Hidden> element in the XML is a direct indicator of a task configured to be hidden, a common technique for persistence. Other events like process creation or task updates lack this specific attribute, making them less effective for detecting hidden tasks.

Exam trap

The trap here is assuming that process creation events (like schtasks.exe) or task update events provide enough detail to detect hidden tasks, when only the task creation event contains the XML with the hidden flag.

22
Multi-Selectmedium

Which TWO file integrity monitoring (FIM) events would be most useful to detect potential unauthorized persistence mechanisms?

Select 2 answers
A.Creation of files in C:\ProgramData\Microsoft\Windows\Start Menu\Programs\StartUp
B.Access to C:\Windows\System32\drivers\etc\hosts
C.Modification of HKLM\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Run
D.Changes to desktop background images
E.Reading of browser profile files
AnswersA, C

The StartUp folder is a classic autostart location; any new file created there indicates a program will execute at user logon, a common persistence technique. Monitoring this path detects unauthorised startup entries that other FIM events would miss.

Why this answer

Option A is correct because the StartUp folder at C:\ProgramData\Microsoft\Windows\Start Menu\Programs\StartUp is a well-known autostart location, and creation of files there can indicate an attacker establishing persistence that executes at user logon. Option C is correct because the HKLM\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Run registry key is a classic persistence mechanism, and its modification can reveal malicious programs configured to launch automatically at system startup. Option B is not correct because merely accessing the hosts file is not a persistence event, although unauthorized modification of it could be suspicious.

Option D is not correct because desktop background changes are cosmetic and not a recognized persistence technique. Option E is not correct because reading browser profile files may indicate credential theft or reconnaissance, but it does not itself establish persistence.

Exam trap

The trap here is confusing access events with modification events, and mistaking non-persistence activities (like reading browser files or changing wallpaper) for persistence mechanisms.

23
MCQhard

A threat hunter is investigating a suspected Kerberoasting attack. Which Windows event ID should the hunter analyze to identify service tickets being requested for accounts with Service Principal Names (SPNs)?

A.Event ID 4771
B.Event ID 4624
C.Event ID 4768
D.Event ID 4769
AnswerD

Event ID 4769 is generated when a Kerberos service ticket is requested. In a Kerberoasting attack, the attacker requests service tickets for accounts with SPNs, which are encrypted with the service account's password hash. The attacker can then extract the ticket and crack it offline. Monitoring Event ID 4769 for requests with weak encryption types (e.g., RC4) and unusual service names is key to detecting Kerberoasting.

Why this answer

Kerberoasting involves requesting Kerberos service tickets for accounts with SPNs and then cracking them offline. Event ID 4769 is generated for each service ticket request. Hunters should look for a high volume of 4769 events, especially with encryption type 0x17 (RC4) and for services that are not normally accessed.

This pattern indicates an attacker attempting to extract and crack service account credentials.

Exam trap

The trap here is confusing TGT requests (4768) with service ticket requests (4769), which are the core of Kerberoasting.

24
Multi-Selecthard

A hunter is investigating anomalous DNS activity on an internal resolver. Several endpoints are issuing high volumes of queries for long, random-looking subdomains under a single registered domain, with responses that are mostly NXDOMAIN but occasionally resolve. Which TWO detection approaches would most effectively confirm whether this is DNS tunneling or domain generation algorithm activity? (Choose two.)

Select 2 answers
A.Correlate the timing and volume of queries with the process that initiated them using endpoint DNS client event telemetry.
B.Review the resolver's cache hit ratio and increase the TTL on all cached records to reduce query volume.
C.Search the SIEM for the registered domain across historical proxy logs and add it to a watchlist if it appears in any HTTP request.
D.Block all outbound DNS at the perimeter and force every endpoint to use DNS over HTTPS to a public resolver.
E.Compute the distribution of query name lengths and entropy per endpoint over time and compare against a baseline of normal DNS behavior.
AnswersA, E

Attributing DNS queries to the originating process distinguishes malicious tooling from browsers and updaters. Sysmon Event ID 22 or equivalent DNS client logging shows which image issued the query, so a non-browser process generating thousands of random subdomain lookups strongly confirms tunneling or DGA behavior and identifies the compromised binary.

Why this answer

Confirming DNS tunneling or DGA activity requires both statistical characterization of the query names and attribution to the originating process. Measuring query length and entropy against a per-endpoint baseline exposes algorithmically generated or encoded names, while endpoint DNS client telemetry ties those queries to the specific binary responsible. Together these methods produce defensible evidence rather than relying on blocklists.

Exam trap

The trap here is treating any high-volume DNS as malicious or jumping to perimeter blocking, when the discriminating evidence is the query name characteristics plus which process issued them.

25
MCQhard

A hunter is reviewing Zeek conn.log and notices long-lived, low-volume TLS sessions from several internal workstations to the same external IP on port 443 where the server certificate is self-signed, the JA3S value is identical across all sessions, and the byte counts are almost symmetric over hours. The workstations show no matching DNS queries for that IP and no proxy logs because the traffic bypasses the proxy. Which hypothesis best fits this evidence?

A.The pattern is consistent with beaconing to hard-coded C2 infrastructure using a custom TLS profile, and the hunter should pivot on the JA3S value and destination IP.
B.The traffic represents normal HTTPS browsing because port 443 is used and the sessions are encrypted end to end.
C.A sanctioned software update service is being reached over a direct TLS channel that bypasses the proxy by design.
D.The sessions indicate a misconfigured internal service because self-signed certificates are only used inside an organization's own address space.
AnswerA

Direct-to-IP TLS, self-signed certificates, identical server fingerprints across multiple hosts, and periodic symmetric low-volume traffic are classic hallmarks of beaconing with a custom or malleable C2 profile. Because DNS and proxy data are absent, the JA3S value and destination IP become the highest-fidelity pivots. Correlating those across the estate can reveal additional compromised hosts and confirm the campaign scope before containment.

Why this answer

Direct-to-IP TLS with a self-signed certificate, a uniform JA3S fingerprint, and steady low-volume symmetric sessions indicates a beacon using a custom TLS profile. Pivoting on the server fingerprint and destination IP lets the hunter find other affected hosts and confirm the campaign before remediation.

Exam trap

The trap here is treating encrypted traffic on port 443 as inherently trustworthy and overlooking that the absence of DNS and proxy records is itself a strong anomaly signal.

26
MCQmedium

An analyst is investigating potential persistence via WMI event subscriptions. Which WMI namespace should the hunter focus on for suspicious event consumers?

A.root\default
B.root\security
C.root\cimv2
D.root\subscription
AnswerD

WMI persistence relies on `__EventFilter`, `__EventConsumer` and `__FilterToConsumerBinding` instances, all of which reside in the `root\subscription` namespace. Hunting there surfaces suspicious permanent event subscriptions, whereas default namespaces such as `root\cimv2` do not host these consumer classes.

Why this answer

The root\subscription namespace is the correct focus because it is the dedicated WMI repository location where permanent event subscriptions are stored. Attackers use this namespace to create __EventFilter, __EventConsumer, and __FilterToConsumerBinding instances that persist across reboots, enabling fileless persistence and code execution. Unlike transient subscriptions that exist only in memory, these permanent subscriptions reside in root\subscription and are automatically reinstated by the WMI service at startup, making them a prime hunting ground for suspicious event consumers.

Exam trap

The trap here is confusing the general WMI namespace root\cimv2 (commonly used for querying system information) with the specialized root\subscription namespace where permanent event consumers are actually stored, leading candidates to overlook the correct persistence location.

How to eliminate wrong answers

Option A is wrong because root\default is a general-purpose namespace used for default WMI class definitions and does not host permanent event subscription components; it is not the standard location for __EventConsumer instances. Option B is wrong because root\security is a specialized namespace for security-related WMI classes (e.g., BitLocker, TPM) and does not store event subscription filters or consumers. Option C is wrong because root\cimv2 is the primary namespace for CIM classes representing hardware, OS, and software inventory; while it can contain transient event subscriptions, permanent event consumers are not stored there by default and are instead registered in root\subscription.

27
MCQmedium

A threat hunter reviewing Windows Security event logs notices that a service account's credentials were used to authenticate to 14 workstations within a 3-minute window, all successful logons with Logon Type 3. No scheduled tasks or administrative scripts are known to run under this account. Which hypothesis best explains this pattern and should drive the next hunt step?

A.The account is being used for lateral movement via SMB or remote service execution, and the hunter should pivot to Event ID 5140/5145 and service creation telemetry on the target hosts.
B.The account is being brute-forced by an external attacker, and the hunter should immediately review Event ID 4625 failures on the domain controller.
C.The workstations are performing a scheduled vulnerability scan using domain credentials, and the hunter should correlate with the scanner's IP range before escalating.
D.The account is experiencing a Kerberos ticket renewal storm, and the hunter should analyze Event ID 4769 service ticket requests on the KDC.
AnswerA

Logon Type 3 is a network logon, and a single account authenticating to many hosts in a short burst is a classic lateral movement signature, typically via SMB, PsExec-style service creation, or remote scheduled tasks. Pivoting to share access events and service installation telemetry on the target machines confirms whether tools were dropped or executed.

Why this answer

A burst of successful Logon Type 3 authentications from one service account across many workstations is a strong lateral movement indicator. Attackers using SMB, remote service creation, or remote execution tools generate exactly this footprint. The productive next step is to pivot to the destination hosts and examine share access, service installation, and process creation events to determine what was executed after authentication.

Exam trap

The trap here is assuming that successful logons are inherently benign and focusing on failed logon counts, when the volume and spread of successful network logons is the actual intrusion signal.

28
MCQeasy

When hunting for credential dumping using Mimikatz, which process memory access pattern is the most common indicator?

A.Access to csrss.exe
B.Access to svchost.exe
C.Access to lsass.exe
D.Access to explorer.exe
AnswerC

Mimikatz extracts credentials by reading LSASS process memory, where Windows stores plaintext passwords, hashes and Kerberos tickets. Endpoint telemetry showing unusual processes opening lsass.exe with read access is therefore the strongest credential-dumping indicator during threat hunting.

Why this answer

Mimikatz is a credential-dumping tool that extracts plaintext passwords, hashes, PINs, and Kerberos tickets from memory. Its primary target is the Local Security Authority Subsystem Service (lsass.exe), which stores credential material in Windows. Therefore, the most common indicator of credential dumping is a process accessing lsass.exe memory, often via OpenProcess with PROCESS_VM_READ and ReadProcessMemory calls.

Exam trap

The trap here is assuming any process access is suspicious; candidates may pick svchost.exe or csrss.exe because they are common Windows processes, but the exam expects knowledge that lsass.exe is the credential store targeted by Mimikatz.

How to eliminate wrong answers

Option A is wrong because csrss.exe is the Client/Server Runtime Subsystem responsible for console windows and process/thread creation — it does not store credential material, so access to it is not a credential-dumping indicator. Option B is wrong because svchost.exe hosts multiple Windows services and, while it can be abused for other attacks, it is not the primary credential store targeted by Mimikatz. Option D is wrong because explorer.exe is the Windows shell and does not hold credential secrets; access to it is not indicative of credential dumping.

29
Multi-Selecthard

A threat hunter is investigating possible data staging prior to exfiltration on a file server. The hunter has full Windows Security auditing, Sysmon, and PowerShell logging available. Which TWO telemetry patterns most directly indicate that an adversary is staging and compressing collected data on the host? (Choose two.)

Select 2 answers
A.A single process creating a large number of file read operations across many directories within a short window, followed by writes to one new archive file.
B.Repeated DNS queries from the server to a single external domain at irregular intervals with varying query types.
C.Creation of a password-protected archive with a non-standard extension in a user-writable directory by a process whose parent is a web server worker process.
D.A high volume of failed authentication attempts against the file server from multiple internal workstations.
E.Scheduled tasks created by the built-in backup service account to copy files to a known backup share each night.
AnswersA, C

Reading many files across disparate directories and then writing a single consolidated archive is the canonical staging signature: collection followed by compression into one artifact for exfiltration. Sysmon Event ID 11 file-create telemetry combined with Event ID 1 process creation for a compression utility lets the hunter tie the reads and the archive write to one parent process. This pattern is far more indicative of staging than ordinary backup or indexing activity.

Why this answer

Staging is characterized by broad collection followed by consolidation into a single archive, and by archiving that deviates from normal administrative patterns. Reading many directories then writing one archive, and creating an encrypted archive with a non-standard extension from a web server parent, both directly evidence that behavior.

Exam trap

The trap here is conflating pre-exfiltration staging with command-and-control or credential access activity, which produces entirely different telemetry than local file collection and archiving.

30
MCQeasy

A threat hunter is reviewing DNS logs to detect potential domain generation algorithm (DGA) activity. Which characteristic is most indicative of a DGA-generated domain?

A.The domain is long, uses a non-standard TLD, and has a high entropy score.
B.The domain contains a high number of random-looking characters and has a low entropy score.
C.The domain resolves to an IP address that is geolocated in the same country as the victim.
D.The domain is a subdomain of a popular legitimate service like 'cloudfront.net'.
AnswerA

DGA-generated domains often consist of random alphanumeric strings, resulting in high entropy. They may also use unusual TLDs to avoid blocklists. Length can vary, but high entropy and non-standard TLDs are strong indicators. This combination is commonly seen in malware using DGAs for command-and-control.

Why this answer

DGA-generated domains are created by malware to randomly generate domain names for command-and-control. They often appear as random strings with high entropy and may use non-standard TLDs. This makes them stand out in DNS logs.

Other characteristics like low entropy, subdomains of legitimate services, or IP geolocation are not typical of DGA activity.

Exam trap

The trap here is confusing DGA domains with domain fronting or legitimate service abuse, which involve different detection methods.

31
Multi-Selecthard

When hunting for lateral movement, which THREE activities should be flagged as highly suspicious in a Windows environment?

Select 3 answers
A.Remote RDP access to a Domain Controller
B.Opening a local text file
C.Execution of services.exe via WMI
D.Standard user running 'whoami'
E.Creation of remote services via SC.exe
AnswersA, C, E

Domain Controllers hold authentication authority; interactive RDP sessions to them are rare in normal administration, which typically uses RSAT or WinRM. Such access often indicates credential theft and privileged lateral movement, warranting immediate investigation during threat hunting.

Why this answer

Option A is correct because interactive RDP logons to a Domain Controller are highly unusual in normal operations — DCs are administered via RSAT, WinRM, or console access, so a Type 10 logon (Event ID 4624) to a DC often indicates credential abuse or lateral movement toward the highest-value target. Option C is correct because WMI is a legitimate remote management mechanism, but services.exe (or its child processes) being spawned via WMI (e.g., Win32_Process Create) is a classic lateral-movement and execution technique used by tools like Impacket's wmiexec and Cobalt Strike, since it lets an attacker run code remotely without dropping a binary to disk. Option E is correct because creating a service remotely with sc.exe (or PsExec-style service creation) is a well-known lateral-movement and persistence method — it requires admin rights on the target and results in Event ID 7045 (a new service was installed) plus 4697, making it a strong indicator of compromise.

Option B is not suspicious because opening a local text file is a routine user action with no lateral-movement significance. Option D is not suspicious because 'whoami' is a benign built-in command that standard users and administrators run constantly for troubleshooting, and it does not by itself indicate movement across hosts.

Exam trap

The trap here is confusing common administrative commands (like whoami) with actual lateral movement indicators; candidates may over-flag benign discovery actions while missing the specific remote execution techniques that enable movement across systems.

32
Multi-Selecthard

Which THREE indicators are strong evidence of a 'Pass-the-Hash' attack occurring in your network?

Select 3 answers
A.Logon Type 3 occurring from a workstation to a workstation
B.Logon from an unexpected source IP
C.Success of local service startup
D.NTLM authentication instead of Kerberos
E.High volume of Kerberos TGS requests
AnswersA, B, D

Pass-the-Hash reuses captured NTLM hashes over SMB, producing Type 3 network logons between workstations where no legitimate file-share access should occur. Workstation-to-workstation Type 3 authentication therefore indicates lateral movement with stolen credentials rather than normal user behaviour.

Why this answer

Option A is correct because Pass-the-Hash (PtH) abuses NTLM authentication to move laterally, and a Logon Type 3 (network logon) from one workstation to another is abnormal in most environments and is a classic signature of PtH lateral movement using stolen NTLM hashes. Option B is correct because a successful logon originating from an unexpected or unusual source IP indicates an attacker is authenticating with compromised credentials/hashes from a host that should not be initiating such access, which is a strong PtH indicator. Option D is correct because PtH relies on NTLM authentication (the hash is replayed directly), so observing NTLM authentication where Kerberos would normally be expected (e.g., in a domain environment that supports Kerberos) is a strong indicator of hash-based authentication abuse.

Option C is not a PtH indicator because successful local service startup is normal system behavior and unrelated to credential theft or replay. Option E is not a PtH indicator because a high volume of Kerberos TGS requests suggests Kerberos ticket activity (e.g., Kerberoasting or normal service ticket requests), not NTLM hash replay.

Exam trap

The trap here is confusing Kerberos-based attacks (like Kerberoasting, which generates TGS requests) with NTLM-based Pass-the-Hash, leading candidates to select high Kerberos TGS volume as an indicator.

33
MCQhard

While using ELK Stack for threat hunting, you need to identify beaconing behavior. Which aggregation function would best reveal periodicity in connection intervals?

A.Standard deviation on interval deltas
B.Sum aggregation on connection counts
C.Min/Max aggregation on bytes
D.Cardinality count on source IPs
AnswerA

Standard deviation on interval deltas exposes beaconing because consistent command-and-control check-ins produce uniformly small deltas, yielding a low deviation, whereas irregular human traffic scatters widely. This aggregation directly satisfies the stem's requirement to reveal periodicity in connection intervals within ELK Stack, surfacing the regularity that other functions obscure.

Why this answer

Beaconing is characterized by regular, periodic callbacks from an infected host to C2 infrastructure. To detect periodicity, you must analyze the intervals between successive connections from the same source to the same destination. Computing the standard deviation of those interval deltas reveals how consistent the timing is — a low standard deviation indicates highly regular beaconing (e.g., every 60 seconds ± 2s), which is a strong indicator of automated C2.

Exam trap

The trap here is confusing volume-based aggregations (sum, cardinality) with temporal aggregations; candidates often pick sum or count because they think 'more connections = beaconing,' but periodicity requires interval-delta statistics like standard deviation.

How to eliminate wrong answers

Option B is wrong because a sum aggregation on connection counts only gives total volume, which cannot distinguish periodic beaconing from bursty or random traffic. Option C is wrong because Min/Max on bytes shows payload size extremes, not timing patterns — beaconing detection requires temporal analysis, not byte-volume analysis. Option D is wrong because cardinality on source IPs counts unique sources, which is useful for detecting scanning or distributed attacks but does nothing to reveal periodicity in connection intervals.

34
Multi-Selecthard

A threat hunter is investigating a suspected data exfiltration channel that uses DNS tunneling. The organization's DNS logs capture query names, query types, response codes, and source hosts, but not full packet payloads. Which TWO characteristics of the DNS queries would most reliably indicate tunneling activity rather than normal DNS behavior? (Choose two.)

Select 2 answers
A.Frequent NXDOMAIN responses for typo-like domain names across the entire organization.
B.Queries that use the A record type for well-known public domains from many different hosts.
C.Unusually long and high-entropy subdomain labels encoded in the query name.
D.Periodic PTR record queries for internal RFC1918 addresses from a single host.
E.A high volume of TXT record queries from a single internal host over an extended period.
AnswersC, E

DNS tunneling encodes exfiltrated data into subdomain labels, producing long, high-entropy strings that differ sharply from human-readable domain names. Because the logs lack payloads, label length and entropy are the most direct remnants of the encoded data. Legitimate services rarely generate such labels at scale, making this a high-value detection characteristic.

Why this answer

Without payload visibility, tunneling must be inferred from query shape and type: long, high-entropy subdomain labels carry encoded data, and sustained TXT queries from one host exploit a record type and volume that normal endpoints rarely produce. Popular A-record lookups, organization-wide NXDOMAIN noise, and internal PTR queries all match benign baselines and cannot isolate a tunneling channel.

Exam trap

The trap here is selecting NXDOMAIN volume as a tunneling indicator, when tunneling domains usually resolve successfully and the distinguishing features are label entropy and TXT record abuse.

35
MCQmedium

A threat hunter is reviewing DNS query logs from a corporate recursive resolver to identify hosts that may be beaconing to a domain generation algorithm (DGA) family. The hunter notices that one workstation generates many queries for short, random-looking domains that all fail with NXDOMAIN, while another workstation generates far fewer queries but with a consistent subdomain string appended to a long-lived domain. Which observation most strongly indicates an active DGA-based beacon rather than normal application behavior?

A.Queries for popular public domains that resolve successfully and are repeated across many workstations.
B.A high volume of NXDOMAIN responses for algorithmically generated names from a single internal host.
C.A consistent subdomain string appended to a single long-lived domain queried at regular intervals.
D.Queries for domains that resolve to private RFC1918 address space from an internal host.
AnswerB

DGA malware rapidly cycles through many generated domain names until one resolves, producing a distinctive burst of NXDOMAIN answers from a single host. This pattern is not typical for legitimate applications, which query stable, known domains. The volume, randomness, and failure ratio together separate DGA activity from ordinary web traffic or typo-squatting by users.

Why this answer

DGA malware must try many generated domains before finding one the attacker registered, so the resolver sees a burst of NXDOMAIN answers for random-looking names from one host. Stable subdomains, private-space lookups, and popular resolving domains all occur in benign traffic, making them poor DGA indicators. Volume, randomness, and failure ratio together distinguish DGA beaconing.

Exam trap

The trap here is assuming any regular DNS beaconing pattern indicates a DGA, when DGA is specifically characterized by algorithmically generated names producing high NXDOMAIN volume.

36
MCQhard

A hunt for unusual Kerberos activity reveals an 'AS-REP Roasting' attack. What specific event indicator should the analyst look for in domain controller logs?

A.Event ID 4771
B.Event ID 4624
C.Event ID 4769
D.Event ID 4768 with pre-auth not required
AnswerD

AS-REP Roasting exploits accounts with Kerberos pre-authentication disabled, so the domain controller issues a Ticket Granting Ticket without verifying the requester's identity. Event ID 4768 records TGT requests, and its pre-auth not required field flags exactly those vulnerable accounts, satisfying the stem's requirement for a specific domain controller log indicator.

Why this answer

AS-REP Roasting targets accounts configured with 'Do not require Kerberos preauthentication.' When pre-auth is disabled, an attacker can send an AS-REQ without proving identity, and the domain controller responds with an AS-REP containing a ticket encrypted with the user's password hash — which the attacker can crack offline. The corresponding DC event is Event ID 4768 (Kerberos authentication ticket TGT requested), and the key indicator is the pre-authentication type field showing that pre-auth was not required.

Exam trap

The trap is confusing AS-REP Roasting (4768, TGT, no pre-auth) with Kerberoasting (4769, TGS, SPN) or with failed pre-auth (4771); candidates must match the event ID to the specific attack technique.

How to eliminate wrong answers

Option A is wrong because Event ID 4771 is 'Kerberos pre-authentication failed' — it indicates failed logon attempts (e.g., bad password), which is the opposite of AS-REP Roasting where pre-auth is not required at all. Option B is wrong because Event ID 4624 is a successful logon event, which does not capture the Kerberos ticket request details needed to detect AS-REP Roasting. Option C is wrong because Event ID 4769 is a Kerberos service ticket (TGS) request, associated with Kerberoasting (targeting SPNs), not AS-REP Roasting which involves TGT requests.

37
MCQmedium

A threat hunter is reviewing Sysmon event logs to detect credential dumping. The hunter observes that a process opened lsass.exe with access rights 0x1410 and then created a memory dump file. Which Sysmon event ID and field combination is most directly relevant for detecting this activity?

A.Event ID 1 (Process Create) with the CommandLine field containing 'lsass.exe'.
B.Event ID 10 (ProcessAccess) with the GrantedAccess field equal to 0x1410 and TargetImage pointing to lsass.exe.
C.Event ID 7 (Image Loaded) with the ImageLoaded field referencing a DLL loaded into lsass.exe.
D.Event ID 11 (FileCreate) with the TargetFilename field ending in '.dmp'.
AnswerB

Sysmon Event ID 10 logs process access events, including the GrantedAccess mask and the target process. A GrantedAccess of 0x1410 (PROCESS_QUERY_INFORMATION | PROCESS_VM_READ) on lsass.exe is a strong indicator of credential dumping tools like Mimikatz. This event directly captures the suspicious access to LSASS memory.

Why this answer

Sysmon Event ID 10 (ProcessAccess) captures when a process opens another process with specific access rights. A GrantedAccess value of 0x1410 on lsass.exe indicates an attempt to read LSASS memory, a common technique for credential dumping. This event provides the direct evidence needed to detect such activity, unlike process creation or file creation events that lack the access mask detail.

Exam trap

The trap here is assuming that process creation events alone can reveal credential dumping, when the critical evidence is the access mask in process access events.

38
MCQeasy

A threat hunter is examining network traffic to identify potential command-and-control (C2) communication. Which characteristic of the traffic is most indicative of a C2 channel using HTTP?

A.Regular, periodic beaconing with consistent intervals
B.Use of standard ports like 80 and 443
C.Encrypted payloads with self-signed certificates
D.Large outbound data transfers to a single external IP
AnswerA

C2 frameworks often use beaconing, where the infected host periodically checks in with the C2 server at fixed intervals (e.g., every 60 seconds) to receive commands. This regular, predictable timing is a strong indicator of automated C2 communication. While some malware uses jitter to randomize intervals, consistent beaconing remains a primary hunting lead. The other options are less specific to C2 and can occur in normal traffic.

Why this answer

C2 communication often exhibits beaconing, where the malware periodically contacts the C2 server at regular intervals. This regular timing is a hallmark of automated C2 frameworks like Cobalt Strike or Metasploit. While other characteristics like encryption or port usage can be present, beaconing is the most consistent and specific indicator.

Hunters should analyze network flow data for periodic connections to external hosts, especially those with consistent intervals and small data transfers.

Exam trap

The trap here is focusing on encryption or port numbers, which are common in legitimate traffic, rather than the timing pattern that distinguishes C2 beaconing.

Ready to test yourself?

Try a timed practice session using only Threat Hunting And Detection questions.