CAS-005 Exam Dumps - CompTIA SecurityX Certification Exam

Excessive MFA push notifications can be a sign of an attempted push notification attack, where attackers repeatedly send MFA prompts hoping the user will eventually approve one by mistake. To mitigate this:

A. Provisioning FIDO2 devices: While FIDO2 devices offer strong authentication, they may not be practical for all users and do not directly address the issue of excessive push notifications.

B. Deploying a text message-based MFA: SMS-based MFA can still be vulnerable to similar spamming attacks and phishing.

C. Enabling OTP via email: Email-based OTPs add another layer of security but do not directly solve the issue of excessive notifications.

D. Configuring prompt-driven MFA: This option allows users to respond to prompts in a secure manner, often including features like time-limited approval windows, additional verification steps, or requiring specific actions to approve. This can help prevent users from accidentally approving malicious attempts.

Configuring prompt-driven MFA is the best solution to restrict unnecessary MFA notifications and improve security.

References:

CompTIA Security+ Study Guide

NIST SP 800-63B, "Digital Identity Guidelines"

"Multi-Factor Authentication: Best Practices" by Microsoft

To reduce the number of failed patch deployments, the systems administrator should implement a robust change management process. Change management ensures that all modifications to systems or applications are planned, tested, and approved before deployment. This systematic approach reduces the risk of unplanned changes that can cause patch failures and ensures that patches are deployed in a controlled and predictable manner.

References:

CompTIA SecurityX Study Guide: Emphasizes the importance of change management in maintaining system integrity and ensuring successful patch deployments.

ITIL (Information Technology Infrastructure Library) Framework: Provides best practices for change management in IT services.

"The Phoenix Project" by Gene Kim, Kevin Behr, and George Spafford: Discusses the critical role of change management in IT operations and its impact on system stability and reliability.

Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) is crucial for identifying and addressing security vulnerabilities during the software development life cycle (SDLC). Ensuring that DAST scans are routinely scheduled helps in maintaining a secure development process.

Why Routine DAST Scans?

Continuous Security Assessment: Regular DAST scans help in identifying vulnerabilities in real-time, ensuring they are addressed promptly.

Compliance: Routine scans ensure that the development process complies with security standards and regulations.

Proactive Threat Mitigation: Regular scans help in early detection and mitigation of potential security threats, reducing the risk of breaches.

Integration into SDLC: Ensures security is embedded within the development process, promoting a security-first approach.

Other options, while relevant, do not directly address the continuous assessment and proactive identification of threats:

A. If developers are unable to promote to production: This is more of an operational issue than a security assessment.

B. If DAST code is being stored to a single code repository: This concerns code management rather than security testing frequency.

D. If role-based training is deployed: While important, training alone does not ensure continuous security assessment.

References:

CompTIA SecurityX Study Guide

OWASP Testing Guide

NIST Special Publication 800-53, "Security and Privacy Controls for Information Systems and Organizations"

To mitigate the issue of excessive permissions and privilege creep, the best solutions are:

Implementing a Role-Based Access Policy:

Role-Based Access Control (RBAC): This policy ensures that access permissions are granted based on the user's role within the organization, aligning with the principle of least privilege. Users are only granted access necessary for their role, reducing the risk of excessive permissions.

References:

CompTIA Security+ SY0-601 Study Guide by Mike Chapple and David Seidl

NIST Special Publication 800-53: Security and Privacy Controls for Information Systems and Organizations

Performing Periodic Access Reviews:

Regular Audits: Periodic access reviews help identify and rectify instances of privilege creep by ensuring that users' access permissions are appropriate for their current roles. These reviews can highlight unnecessary or outdated permissions, allowing for timely adjustments.

References:

CompTIA Security+ SY0-601 Study Guide by Mike Chapple and David Seidl

ISO/IEC 27001:2013 - Information Security Management

The table shows detailed information about products, including location, chassis manufacturer, OS, application developer, and vendor. This type of information is typically assessed in a supply chain assessment to evaluate the security and reliability of components and services from different suppliers.

Why Supply Chain Assessment?

Component Evaluation: Assessing the origin and security of each component used in the products, including hardware, software, and third-party services.

Vendor Reliability: Evaluating the security practices and reliability of vendors involved in providing components or services.

Risk Management: Identifying potential risks associated with the supply chain, such as vulnerabilities in third-party components or insecure development practices.

Other types of assessments do not align with the detailed supplier and component information provided:

A. System: Focuses on individual system security, not the broader supply chain.

C. Quantitative: Focuses on numerical risk assessments, not supplier information.

D. Organizational: Focuses on internal organizational practices, not external suppliers.

References:

CompTIA SecurityX Study Guide

NIST Special Publication 800-161, "Supply Chain Risk Management Practices for Federal Information Systems and Organizations"

"Supply Chain Security Best Practices," Gartner Research

Tokenization replaces sensitive data elements with non-sensitive equivalents, called tokens, that can be used within the internal tests. The original data is stored securely and can be retrieved if necessary. This approach allows the software development team to work with data that appears realistic and valid without exposing the actual sensitive information.

Configuring data hashing (Option A) is not suitable for test data as it transforms the data into a fixed-length value that is not usable in the same way as the original data. Replacing data with null records (Option C) is not useful as it does not provide valid data for testing. Data obfuscation (Option D) could be an alternative but might not meet the regulatory requirements as effectively as tokenization.

References:

CompTIA Security+ Study Guide

NIST SP 800-57 Part 1 Rev. 5, "Recommendation for Key Management"

PCI DSS Tokenization Guidelines

To meet the requirements of only allowing internally signed applications, preventing unauthorized software installations, and logging attempts to run unauthorized software, configuring application control with blocked hashes and enterprise-trusted root certificates is the best solution. This approach ensures that only applications signed by trusted certificates are allowed to execute, while all other attempts are blocked and logged. It effectively prevents unauthorized software installations by restricting execution to pre-approved applications.

References:

CompTIA SecurityX Study Guide: Describes application control mechanisms and the use of trusted certificates to enforce security policies.

NIST Special Publication 800-53, "Security and Privacy Controls for Information Systems and Organizations": Recommends application whitelisting and execution control for securing endpoints.

"The Application Security Handbook" by Mark Dowd, John McDonald, and Justin Schuh: Covers best practices for implementing application control and managing trusted certificates

The best way to automate reporting from disparate security appliances that do not currently communicate is to configure an API Integration to aggregate the different data sets. Here's why:

Interoperability: APIs allow different systems to communicate and share data, even if they were not originally designed to work together. This enables the integration of various security appliances into a unified reporting system.

Automation: API integrations can automate the process of data collection, aggregation, and reporting, reducing manual effort and increasing efficiency.

Scalability: APIs provide a scalable solution that can easily be extended to include additional security appliances or data sources as needed.

References:

CompTIA Security+ SY0-601 Study Guide by Mike Chapple and David Seidl

NIST Special Publication 800-95: Guide to Secure Web Services

OWASP API Security Top Ten