Quick Answer
The answer is MFA fatigue attack, a technique that bypasses multifactor authentication by exploiting human behavior rather than technical vulnerabilities. This attack works because the attacker already possesses valid credentials, so they trigger repeated push notifications to the user’s device; overwhelmed by the barrage, the victim eventually approves one, granting the attacker access without ever compromising the MFA mechanism itself. On the Systems Security Certified Practitioner SSCP exam, this scenario tests your understanding of social engineering within authentication controls—a common trap is assuming MFA is invulnerable once enabled, when in fact user fatigue can undermine it. Remember the mnemonic “Push to Panic”: if an attacker can push enough prompts, the user will panic and approve, bypassing even strong MFA.
This SSCP practice question tests your understanding of incident response and recovery. 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.
During a security incident, the IR team discovers that an attacker used a valid user account to access sensitive data. The account had multifactor authentication (MFA) enabled. Which attack technique most likely bypassed the MFA?
Clue words in this question
Noticing these words before you look at the options changes how you read each choice.
Clue: "most likely"
Why it matters: Probability qualifier — the question wants the most probable cause or outcome, not a guaranteed one. Eliminate low-probability options.
Session hijacking
Why wrong: Session hijacking assumes an authenticated session, not bypassing MFA.
MFA fatigue attack
The attacker spams MFA requests until the user approves.
Man-in-the-middle (MITM) attack
Why wrong: MITM can intercept credentials but MFA typically requires a second factor.
Token theft from the endpoint
Why wrong: Token theft may allow reuse but does not bypass MFA challenge.
Answer choices
Answer the question above first, then reveal the full breakdown to understand why each option is right or wrong.
Correct answer & explanation
MFA fatigue attack
MFA fatigue attacks exploit user behavior by bombarding the victim with repeated push notifications until they inadvertently approve an authentication request. Since the attacker already has the valid credentials, they trigger the MFA prompt repeatedly, and the user eventually accepts, granting the attacker access without needing to compromise the MFA mechanism itself.
Key principle: Answer the scenario, not the keyword: identify the specific constraint before choosing the most familiar-sounding option.
Answer analysis
For each option: why learners choose it and why it is or isn't the right answer here.
Session hijacking
Why it's wrong here
Session hijacking assumes an authenticated session, not bypassing MFA.
MFA fatigue attack
Why this is correct
The attacker spams MFA requests until the user approves.
Clue confirmation
The clue word "most likely" in the question point toward this answer.
Related concept
Read the scenario before looking for a memorised answer.
Man-in-the-middle (MITM) attack
Why it's wrong here
MITM can intercept credentials but MFA typically requires a second factor.
Token theft from the endpoint
Why it's wrong here
Token theft may allow reuse but does not bypass MFA challenge.
Common exam traps
ISC2 often tests the distinction between technical bypasses (e.g., token theft, MITM) and social/behavioral bypasses (e.g., MFA fatigue), leading candidates to overcomplicate the attack when the simplest explanation—user error under pressure—is correct.
Detailed technical explanation
MFA fatigue attacks often target organizations using push-based MFA (e.g., Microsoft Authenticator, Duo Security) where the user simply taps 'Approve' on a notification. Attackers automate the sending of dozens of push requests in rapid succession, leveraging the user's desensitization or desire to stop the alerts. This technique is distinct from brute-forcing the MFA code because it exploits human psychology rather than cryptographic weaknesses.
Key takeaway
Answer the scenario, not the keyword: identify the specific constraint before choosing the most familiar-sounding option.
Real-world example
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.
What to study next
Identify which exam domain this question belongs to, review the core concept, then practise similar questions from the same domain.
Incident Response and Recovery — study guide chapter
Learn the concepts, then practise the questions
Incident Response and Recovery practice questions
Targeted practice on this topic area only
All SSCP questions
504 questions across all exam domains
Systems Security Certified Practitioner SSCP study guide
Full concept coverage aligned to exam objectives
SSCP practice test guide
How to use practice tests most effectively before exam day
Related practice questions
Use these pages to review the topic behind this question. This is how one missed question becomes focused revision.
Practise SSCP questions linked to Risk Identification, Monitoring and Analysis.
Practise SSCP questions linked to Network and Communications Security.
Practise SSCP questions linked to Systems and Application Security.
Practise SSCP questions linked to Security Operations and Administration.
Practise SSCP questions linked to Incident Response and Recovery.
Practise SSCP questions linked to Access Controls.
Practise SSCP questions linked to Cryptography.
Practise SSCP questions linked to SSCP fundamentals.
Practise SSCP questions linked to SSCP scenario.
Practise SSCP questions linked to SSCP troubleshooting.
Practice this exam
Short sessions build daily habit. Longer sessions build exam-day stamina. Try a timed session to simulate real conditions.
FAQ
Incident Response and Recovery — This question tests Incident Response and Recovery — Read the scenario before looking for a memorised answer..
The correct answer is: MFA fatigue attack — MFA fatigue attacks exploit user behavior by bombarding the victim with repeated push notifications until they inadvertently approve an authentication request. Since the attacker already has the valid credentials, they trigger the MFA prompt repeatedly, and the user eventually accepts, granting the attacker access without needing to compromise the MFA mechanism itself.
Identify which exam domain this question belongs to, review the core concept, then practise similar questions from the same domain.
Yes — watch for: "most likely". Probability qualifier — the question wants the most probable cause or outcome, not a guaranteed one. Eliminate low-probability options.
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 →
Last reviewed: Jun 30, 2026
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.
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.