CS0-003 Exam Dumps - CompTIA CyberSecurity Analyst CySA+ Certification Exam

A new program has been set to execute on system start is the most likely cause of the suspicious activity that is occurring, as it indicates that the malware has modified the registry keys of the system to ensure its persistence. File Integrity Monitoring (FIM) is a tool that monitors changes to files and registry keys on a system and alerts the security analyst of any unauthorized or malicious modifications. The alert triggered by FIM shows that the malware has created a new registry key under the Run subkey, which is used to launch programs automatically when the system starts. The new registry key points to a file named “update.exe” in the Temp folder, which is likely a malicious executable disguised as a legitimate update file. Official References:

https://www.comptia.org/blog/the-new-comptia-cybersecurity-analyst-your-questions-answered

https://partners.comptia.org/docs/default-source/resources/comptia-cysa-cs0-002-exam-objectives

https://www.comptia.org/training/books/cysa-cs0-002-study-guide

Performing input validation before allowing submission is the best recommendation for remediation of this application vulnerability. Input validation is a technique that checks the data entered by users or attackers against a set of rules or constraints, such as data type, length, format, or range. Input validation can prevent common web application attacks such as SQL injection, cross-site scripting (XSS), or command injection, which exploit the lack of input validation to execute malicious code or commands on the server or the client side. By validating the input before allowing submission, the web application can reject or sanitize any malicious or unexpected input, and protect the user credentials and other sensitive data from being compromised12. References: Input Validation - OWASP, 4 Most Common Application Vulnerabilities and Possible Remediation

The output shows the results of a port scan, which is a technique used to identify open ports and services running on a network host. Port scanning can be used by attackers to discover potential vulnerabilities and exploit them, or by defenders to assess the security posture and configuration of their network devices1

The output lists six ports that are open on the target host, along with the service name and version associated with each port. The service name indicates the type of application or protocol that is using the port, while the version indicates the specific release or update of the service. The service name and version can provide useful information for both attackers and defenders, as they can reveal the capabilities, features, and weaknesses of the service.

Among the six ports listed, two are particularly risky and should be investigated further by the security team: port 23 and port 636.

Port 23 is used by Telnet, which is an old and insecure protocol for remote login and command execution. Telnet does not encrypt any data transmitted over the network, including usernames and passwords, which makes it vulnerable to eavesdropping, interception, and modification by attackers. Telnet also has many known vulnerabilities that can allow attackers to gain unauthorized access, execute arbitrary commands, or cause denial-of-service attacks on the target host23

Port 636 is used by LDAP over SSL/TLS (LDAPS), which is a protocol for accessing and modifying directory services over a secure connection. LDAPS encrypts the data exchanged between the client and the server using SSL/TLS certificates, which provide authentication, confidentiality, and integrity. However, LDAPS can also be vulnerable to attacks if the certificates are not properly configured, verified, or updated. For example, attackers can use self-signed or expired certificates to perform man-in-the-middle attacks, spoofing attacks, or certificate revocation attacks on LDAPS connections.

Therefore, the security team should investigate further why port 23 and port 636 are open on the target host, and what services are running on them. The security team should also consider disabling or replacing these services with more secure alternatives, such as SSH for port 23 and StartTLS for port 6362

Increasing training and awareness for all staff is the best way to address the issue of employees being enticed to assist attackers by visiting specific websites and running downloaded files when prompted by phone calls. This issue is an example of social engineering, which is a technique that exploits human psychology and behavior to manipulate people into performing actions or divulging information that benefit the attackers. Social engineering can take many forms, such as phishing, vishing, baiting, quid pro quo, or impersonation. The best defense against social engineering is to educate and train the staff on how to recognize and avoid common social engineering tactics, such as:

Verifying the identity and legitimacy of the caller or sender before following their instructions or clicking on any links or attachments

Being wary of unsolicited or unexpected requests for information or action, especially if they involve urgency, pressure, or threats

Reporting any suspicious or anomalous activity to the security team or the appropriate authority

Following the organization’s policies and procedures on security awareness and best practices

Official References:

https://partners.comptia.org/docs/default-source/resources/comptia-cysa-cs0-002-exam-objectives

https://www.comptia.org/certifications/cybersecurity-analyst

https://www.comptia.org/blog/the-new-comptia-cybersecurity-analyst-your-questions-answered

The discovery of unapproved accounts accessing shared data, along with data discrepancies, strongly indicates unauthorized changes.

Indicators of Unauthorized Changes:

Unexpected user permissions found during audits​.

Modified or deleted data without proper documentation.

Altered system or security configurations, allowing unintended access.

Why Not Other Options?

A. Filesystem Anomaly: This refers to unexpected behavior in the file structure, such as corrupt metadata or missing files, rather than unauthorized user access.

B. Illegal Software: Would involve unlicensed or unauthorized applications, not unauthorized file modifications.

D. Data Exfiltration: If data was removed, it might be exfiltration, but in this case, data modifications were detected instead.

To prevent unauthorized changes, security teams should use:

File Integrity Monitoring (FIM) to detect unauthorized modifications.

Access control audits to verify correct user permissions.

SIEM tools to analyze logs for anomalies.

The user has become an insider threat by downloading software that contains malware onto a computer that eventually infects numerous other systems. An insider threat is a person or entity that has legitimate access to an organization’s systems, networks, or resources and uses that access to cause harm or damage to the organization. An insider threat can be intentional or unintentional, malicious or negligent, and can result from various actions or behaviors, such as downloading unauthorized software, violating security policies, stealing data, sabotaging systems, or collaborating with external attackers.

Based on the list of hosts and their functions, DCEast01, which is a Domain Controller, would be the most pivotal in the distribution of an encryption binary via Group Policy. Domain Controllers are responsible for security and administrative policies within a Windows Domain. Group Policy is a feature of Windows that facilitates a wide range of advanced settings that administrators can use to control the working environment of user accounts and computer accounts. Group Policy can be used to deploy software, which in this case would be the encryption binary of the ransomware. SQL01 is a database server and unlikely to be used for this purpose. WK10-Sales07 and WK7-Plant01 are client machines, and HQAdmin9, although it is a network admin laptop, would not typically be used to distribute policies across a network.

The exploit code maturity of a vulnerability is indicated by the E metric in the CVSS temporal score. The value of U means that no exploit code is available or unknown1. The other options are not related to the exploit code maturity, but to other aspects of the vulnerability, such as attack vector, scope, availability, and complexity1.