The answer is to manually verify a sample of the findings to confirm true vs. false positives. This is the best next step because automated vulnerability scanners rely on techniques like banner grabbing and service fingerprinting, which can produce inaccurate results when services respond with generic banners or when the scanner misidentifies a patched service as vulnerable. Manual verification, such as testing the exploitability of a finding against the actual application behavior and configuration, is the definitive method to validate false positives in vulnerability scans. On the CISSP exam, this question tests your understanding of the vulnerability management lifecycle and the critical distinction between automated scanning and manual validation—a common trap is to immediately patch or ignore all findings without verification. Remember the mnemonic “Scan, Sample, Verify” to recall that after scanning, you must sample and manually verify before remediation.
CISSP Security Assessment and Testing Practice Question
This CISSP practice question tests your understanding of security assessment and testing. This is a configuration task: choose the command set that satisfies every stated requirement. Small differences — like 'secret' vs 'password' or 'transport input ssh' vs 'all' — change whether the answer is correct. 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 analyst runs a vulnerability scan against a web application and receives a report listing several critical vulnerabilities. However, the development team argues that many of these findings are false positives. Which of the following is the BEST next step for the analyst?
Clue words in this question
Noticing these words before you look at the options changes how you read each choice.
Clue: "best"
Why it matters: Signals that multiple options may be partially correct. Choose the option that most directly solves the exact problem described, not the one that sounds most complete.
Answer the question above first, then reveal the full breakdown to understand why each option is right or wrong.
Correct answer & explanation
✓
Manually verify a sample of the findings to confirm true vs. false positives.
Option B is correct because manual verification is the definitive method to distinguish true positives from false positives in vulnerability scanning. Automated scanners can produce false positives due to factors like incomplete service fingerprinting or reliance on banner grabbing, which may not reflect actual exploitability. The analyst must validate a representative sample of findings against the actual application behavior and configuration before taking further action.
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.
✗
Re-scan the application with the same settings to confirm the results.
Why it's wrong here
Re-scanning with the same settings will produce the same potentially inaccurate results.
✓
Manually verify a sample of the findings to confirm true vs. false positives.
Why this is correct
Manual verification helps identify false positives and prioritize real vulnerabilities.
Clue confirmation
The clue word "best" in the question point toward this answer.
Related concept
Read the scenario before looking for a memorised answer.
✗
Escalate all critical findings to management immediately.
Why it's wrong here
Escalating without verification may waste management's time on false positives.
✗
Retune the vulnerability scanner to reduce false positives and re-scan.
Why it's wrong here
Retuning without understanding the current findings may miss real issues.
Common exam traps
Common exam trap: answer the scenario, not the keyword
The trap here is that candidates often choose Option D (retune the scanner) because they assume tuning reduces false positives, but the CISSP emphasizes that validation through manual testing must precede any scanner configuration changes to avoid missing real vulnerabilities.
Detailed technical explanation
How to think about this question
Vulnerability scanners like Nessus or OpenVAS often rely on version detection via HTTP response headers or service banners, which can be misleading if the application uses a reverse proxy or custom error pages. For example, a scanner might flag a 'SQL Injection' vulnerability based on a generic error message, but manual testing with crafted payloads (e.g., ' OR 1=1 --) can confirm whether the database actually executes the injection. This manual verification process aligns with the NIST SP 800-115 methodology for validating scan results through targeted testing.
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 a sample of the findings to confirm true vs. false positives. — Option B is correct because manual verification is the definitive method to distinguish true positives from false positives in vulnerability scanning. Automated scanners can produce false positives due to factors like incomplete service fingerprinting or reliance on banner grabbing, which may not reflect actual exploitability. The analyst must validate a representative sample of findings against the actual application behavior and configuration before taking further action.
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: "best". Signals that multiple options may be partially correct. Choose the option that most directly solves the exact problem described, not the one that sounds most complete.
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 →
These questions test the same concept from different angles. Work through them to make sure you can recognise it however the exam phrases it.
Variation 1. A vulnerability scanner reports a medium-severity finding on a web server. After investigating, the system administrator claims the finding is a false positive because the service in question is not actually running. Which step should the security analyst take next?
medium
✓ A.Verify the service status using system commands or network scans
B.Remove the finding from the report since the administrator confirmed it
C.Close the finding as accepted risk
D.Escalate the issue to management for risk acceptance
Why A: Option A is correct because the security analyst must independently verify the administrator's claim before taking any action. The vulnerability scanner may have detected a service on a different port or the service may be bound to a non-standard interface; using system commands (e.g., `netstat -tulpn` or `ss -tulpn`) or a targeted network scan (e.g., `nmap -sV -p <port> <target>`) provides objective evidence of whether the service is actually listening. Relying solely on the administrator's assertion without verification could lead to a missed true positive, especially if the service is hidden or misconfigured.
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.
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.