SSCP Risk Identification, Monitoring, and Analysis Practice Question
A security administrator is reviewing a vulnerability scan report and notices a finding labeled as a false positive. What is the most appropriate immediate action?
⚠ Common exam trap
The trap here is treating a false positive as either a real vulnerability requiring patching or as something to ignore, rather than as a scanner accuracy issue to be documented and tuned.
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
✓
Document the false positive and tune the scanner to reduce recurrence.
False positives in vulnerability scans should be verified, documented, and used to tune the scanner to reduce future occurrences. This ensures that the vulnerability management process remains efficient and credible. Applying patches unnecessarily, ignoring without documentation, or escalating to incident response are all incorrect because they either waste resources or fail to address the root cause of the false alert.
Answer analysis
Option-by-option breakdown
For each option: why learners choose it and why it is or isn't the right answer here.
- ✗
Apply the recommended patch immediately to resolve the finding.
Why it's wrong here
Applying a patch for a false positive is unnecessary and could introduce instability or unintended changes to the system. False positives indicate that the scanner incorrectly identified a vulnerability that does not actually exist. Patching based on a false positive wastes resources and may violate change management procedures. The administrator should first verify and document the false positive rather than taking remediation action.
- ✓
Document the false positive and tune the scanner to reduce recurrence.
Why this is correct
When a vulnerability scan yields a false positive, the correct immediate step is to verify it, document the finding, and adjust scanner settings or exclusions to prevent similar false alerts. This maintains the integrity of the vulnerability management process and reduces wasted effort. Patching or ignoring without documentation would be inappropriate, making documentation and tuning the best course of action.
- ✗
Ignore the finding because it is not a real vulnerability.
Why it's wrong here
Simply ignoring a false positive without documentation or scanner tuning means the same false alert will likely reappear in future scans, causing confusion and wasted analysis time. Proper vulnerability management requires tracking and resolving false positives through documentation and configuration adjustments. Ignoring the finding fails to improve the process and may lead to it being overlooked or mishandled later.
- ✗
Escalate the finding to the incident response team as a potential breach.
Why it's wrong here
A false positive is by definition not an actual vulnerability or breach, so escalating to incident response is disproportionate and would waste valuable IR resources. Incident response should be reserved for confirmed or suspected security incidents. The appropriate action is to handle the false positive within the vulnerability management workflow, not to treat it as an active security event.
Go deeper
Related to this question
About these practice questions
One of 971 original SSCP 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 ISC2 exam blueprint
This SSCP 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 SSCP exam.