GCFA Introduction to Memory Forensics Practice Question
An analyst is reviewing a Windows 10 memory image captured from a workstation suspected of malware infection. While examining a process, the analyst notices that the process's page directory base (DTB) points to a valid address, but the process's image path on disk cannot be found. Which Volatility 3 plugin should the analyst use to determine if the process memory contains injected code?
⚠ Common exam trap
The trap here is assuming that any plugin that lists processes or network connections can detect code injection, when only malfind specifically analyzes memory regions for suspicious characteristics.
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
✓
windows.malfind
The windows.malfind plugin is designed to detect injected code by scanning for memory regions that are executable but not backed by a file on disk. In this scenario, the process's image path is missing, which is a red flag for injection. Malfind would reveal such anomalies, helping the analyst confirm the presence of injected code. Other plugins like pslist, netscan, and cmdline do not perform this type of memory analysis.
Answer analysis
Option-by-option breakdown
For each option: why learners choose it and why it is or isn't the right answer here.
- ✗
windows.netscan
Why it's wrong here
windows.netscan enumerates network connections and listening sockets, which is useful for identifying network activity but not for detecting injected code in process memory. It would not reveal memory anomalies like unbacked executable pages. Thus, it is not the appropriate plugin for this scenario.
- ✓
windows.malfind
Why this is correct
windows.malfind scans for memory regions with suspicious characteristics, such as executable permissions and no corresponding file on disk, which are typical of code injection. It helps identify injected code even when the process image is missing. This plugin is specifically designed to detect hidden or injected code in process memory, making it the correct choice for this scenario.
- ✗
windows.pslist
Why it's wrong here
windows.pslist lists active processes by walking the active process list, but it does not analyze memory regions for injected code. It would only show the process exists but not whether it contains injected code. Therefore, it does not address the analyst's need to detect injected code in process memory.
- ✗
windows.cmdline
Why it's wrong here
windows.cmdline displays command-line arguments for processes, which can provide context but does not analyze memory for injected code. It would not detect suspicious memory regions or unbacked executable pages. Consequently, it is not the right tool for identifying injected code in this case.
About these practice questions
One of 292 original GCFA practice questions on Courseiva, each with a full explanation and wrong-answer analysis — not exam dumps or protected exam content. Learn why practice questions differ from exam dumps →
JA
Written and reviewed by Johnson Ajibi, MSc IT Security
Senior Network & Security Engineer · founder of Courseiva
Last reviewed September 2026 · checked against the official GIAC exam blueprint
This GCFA practice question is part of Courseiva's free GIAC 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 GCFA exam.