The answer is to manually verify the vulnerability on a sample of affected hosts. This is the correct first action because automated vulnerability scans are prone to false positives, often caused by incomplete banner grabbing, outdated plugin signatures, or network-level interference that misidentifies a service or configuration. On the CISSP exam, this principle tests your understanding of the vulnerability management lifecycle, specifically the validation phase, and it frequently appears in questions about risk assessment and data accuracy. A common trap is to jump straight to remediation or patch prioritization, but the auditor must first confirm the finding to avoid wasting resources on non-existent issues. Remember the memory tip: “Verify before you rectify”—always validate scan results with manual inspection before taking any further action.
CISSP Security Assessment and Testing Practice Question
This CISSP practice question tests your understanding of security assessment and testing. 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.
A security auditor is reviewing the results of a recently completed internal vulnerability scan. The scan report shows several hosts with the same vulnerability. Which of the following actions should the auditor take FIRST?
Clue words in this question
Noticing these words before you look at the options changes how you read each choice.
Clue: "first"
Why it matters: Order matters here. You are being tested on which action comes before the others — not which action is generally useful.
Answer the question above first, then reveal the full breakdown to understand why each option is right or wrong.
Correct answer & explanation
✓
Manually verify the vulnerability on a sample of affected hosts.
The auditor must first manually verify the vulnerability on a sample of affected hosts because automated vulnerability scans can produce false positives due to factors like incomplete banner grabbing, outdated plugin signatures, or network-level interference. Confirming the finding ensures that subsequent remediation efforts are based on accurate, validated data, preventing wasted resources on non-existent issues.
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.
✓
Manually verify the vulnerability on a sample of affected hosts.
Why this is correct
Manual verification confirms the finding and reduces false positives.
Clue confirmation
The clue word "first" in the question point toward this answer.
Related concept
Read the scenario before looking for a memorised answer.
✗
Immediately apply patches to all affected hosts.
Why it's wrong here
Patching without confirmation may be premature if the finding is a false positive.
✗
Remove the hosts from the network until the vulnerability is resolved.
Why it's wrong here
Removing hosts is disruptive and may not be necessary if the vulnerability is not exploitable.
✗
Re-run the scan with a different scanner.
Why it's wrong here
Re-running with a different scanner may introduce variability without confirming the finding.
Common exam traps
Common exam trap: answer the scenario, not the keyword
The trap here is that candidates may assume automated scan results are always accurate and jump to remediation (Option B) or isolation (Option C), failing to recognize that the first step in the assessment process is to validate findings to avoid acting on false positives.
Detailed technical explanation
How to think about this question
Vulnerability scanners like Nessus or Qualys rely on signature-based detection and often infer vulnerabilities from service banners or version strings, which can be spoofed or outdated. For example, a host running a patched version of OpenSSL might still report the Heartbleed vulnerability if the banner hasn't been updated. Manual verification using tools like OpenSSL s_client or direct inspection of patch levels is essential to confirm the actual exposure.
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 security team runs a vulnerability scan on a web application and discovers an unpatched SQL injection flaw. The team prioritises remediation by CVSS score — critical flaws are patched within 24 hours, high within 7 days. Questions like this test whether you understand vulnerability management processes, scanning tools, and remediation prioritisation.
Related glossary terms
Concepts from this question explained
These glossary pages explain the core terms tested in this CISSP question in full detail.
Security Assessment and Testing — This question tests Security Assessment and Testing — Read the scenario before looking for a memorised answer..
What is the correct answer to this question?
The correct answer is: Manually verify the vulnerability on a sample of affected hosts. — The auditor must first manually verify the vulnerability on a sample of affected hosts because automated vulnerability scans can produce false positives due to factors like incomplete banner grabbing, outdated plugin signatures, or network-level interference. Confirming the finding ensures that subsequent remediation efforts are based on accurate, validated data, preventing wasted resources on non-existent issues.
What should I do if I get this CISSP question wrong?
Identify which exam domain this question belongs to, review the core concept, then practise similar questions from the same domain.
Are there clue words in this question I should notice?
Yes — watch for: "first". Order matters here. You are being tested on which action comes before the others — not which action is generally useful.
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 CISSP practice question is part of Courseiva's free ISC2 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 CISSP 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.