SY0-701 Exam Dumps - CompTIA Security+ Exam 2025

Job rotation is a security control that involves regularly moving employees to different roles within an organization. This practice helps prevent incidents where a single employee has too much control or knowledge about a specific job function, reducing the risk of disruption when an employee leaves. It also helps in identifying any hidden issues or undocumented processes that could cause problems after an employee's departure.

References:

CompTIA Security+ SY0-701 Course Content: Domain 5: Security Program Management and Oversight, which includes job rotation as a method to ensure business continuity and reduce risks​​.

Detailed Explanation:Firewall logs provide details of all network traffic, including connections to and from IoT devices. They are typically the first source of evidence for identifying the time of an exploit. Reference: CompTIA Security+ SY0-701 Study Guide, Domain 4: Security Operations, Section: "Log Analysis for Incident Response"​​.

 A business email compromise (BEC) attack is a type of phishing attack that targets employees who have access to company funds or sensitive information. The attacker impersonates a trusted person, such as an executive, a vendor, or a client, and requests a fraudulent payment, a wire transfer, or confidential data. The attacker often uses social engineering techniques, such as urgency, pressure, or familiarity, to convince the victim to comply with the request12.

In this scenario, option A describes a possible BEC attack, where an employee receives a gift card request in an email that has an executive’s name in the display field of the email. The email may look like it is coming from the executive, but the actual email address may be spoofed or compromised. The attacker may claim that the gift cards are needed for a business purpose, such as rewarding employees or clients, and ask the employee to purchase them and send the codes. This is a common tactic used by BEC attackers to steal money from unsuspecting victims34.

Option B describes a possible ransomware attack, where malicious software encrypts the files on a device and demands a ransom for the decryption key. Option C describes a possible credential harvesting attack, where an attacker tries to obtain the login information of a privileged account by posing as a legitimate authority. Option D describes a possible phishing attack, where an attacker tries to lure the victim to a fake website that mimics the company’s email portal and capture their credentials. These are all types of cyberattacks, but they are not examples of BEC attacks. References = 1: Business Email Compromise - CompTIA Security+ SY0-701 - 2.2 2: CompTIA Security+ SY0-701 Certification Study Guide 3: Business Email Compromise: The 12 Billion Dollar Scam 4: TOTAL: CompTIA Security+ Cert (SY0-701) | Udemy

AMaster Service Agreement (MSA)establishesthe general terms and conditionsfor ongoing business engagements. This allows companies toreuse the same termsacross multiple contracts, revisiting them periodically for updates.

NDA (B)protects confidential information but does not define service terms.

MOU (C)is a non-binding agreement, often used for partnerships, not formal service contracts.

SLA (D)focuses onservice performance expectations, not overall contract terms.

PCI DSS is the Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard, which is a set of security requirements for organizations that store, process, or transmit cardholder data. PCI DSS aims to protect the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of cardholder data and prevent fraud, identity theft, and data breaches. PCI DSS is enforced by the payment card brands, such as Visa, Mastercard, American Express, Discover, and JCB, and applies to all entities involved in the payment card ecosystem, such as merchants, acquirers, issuers, processors, service providers, and payment applications.

If a large bank fails an internal PCI DSS compliance assessment, the most likely outcome is that the bank will face fines from the payment card brands. An internal PCI DSS compliance assessment is a self-assessment that the bank performs to evaluate its own compliance with the PCI DSS requirements. The bank must submit the results of the internal assessment to the payment card brands or their designated agents, such as acquirers or qualified security assessors (QSAs). If the internal assessment reveals that the bank is not compliant with the PCI DSS requirements, the payment card brands may impose fines on the bank as a penalty for violating the PCI DSS contract. The amount and frequency of the fines may vary depending on the severity and duration of the non-compliance, the number and type of cardholder data compromised, and the level of cooperation and remediation from the bank. The fines can range from thousands to millions of dollars per month, and can increase over time if the non-compliance is not resolved.

The other options are not correct because they are not the most likely outcomes if a large bank fails an internal PCI DSS compliance assessment. B. Audit findings. Audit findings are the results of an external PCI DSS compliance assessment that is performed by a QSA or an approved scanning vendor (ASV). An external assessment is required for certain entities that handle a large volume of cardholder data or have a history of non-compliance. An external assessment may also be triggered by a security incident or a request from the payment card brands. Audit findings may reveal the gaps and weaknesses in the bank’s security controls andrecommend corrective actions to achieve compliance. However, audit findings are not the outcome of an internal assessment, which is performed by the bank itself. C. Sanctions. Sanctions are the measures that the payment card brands may take against the bank if the bank fails to pay the fines or comply with the PCI DSS requirements. Sanctions may include increasing the fines, suspending or terminating the bank’s ability to accept or process payment cards, or revoking the bank’s PCI DSS certification. Sanctions are not the immediate outcome of an internal assessment, but rather the possible consequence of prolonged or repeated non-compliance. D. Reputation damage. Reputation damage is the loss of trust and credibility that the bank may suffer from its customers, partners, regulators, and the public if the bank fails an internal PCI DSS compliance assessment. Reputation damage may affect the bank’s brand image, customer loyalty, market share, and profitability. Reputation damage is not a direct outcome of an internal assessment, but rather a potential risk that the bank may face if the non-compliance is exposed or exploited by malicious actors. References = CompTIA Security+ Study Guide (SY0-701), Chapter 8: Governance, Risk, and Compliance, page 388. Professor Messer’s CompTIA SY0-701 Security+ Training Course, Section 8.2: Compliance and Controls, video: PCI DSS (5:12). PCI Security Standards Council, PCI DSS Quick Reference Guide, page 4. PCI Security Standards Council, PCI DSS FAQs, question 8. PCI Security Standards Council, PCI DSS FAQs, question 9. [PCI Security Standards Council], PCI DSS FAQs, question 10. [PCI Security Standards Council], PCI DSS FAQs, question 11. [PCI Security Standards Council], PCI DSS FAQs, question 12. [PCI Security Standards Council], PCI DSS FAQs, question 13. [PCI Security Standards Council], PCI DSS FAQs, question 14. [PCI Security Standards Council], PCI DSS FAQs, question 15. [PCI Security Standards Council], PCI DSS FAQs, question 16. [PCI Security Standards Council], PCI DSS FAQs, question 17. [PCI Security Standards Council], PCI DSS FAQs, question 18. [PCI Security Standards Council], PCI DSS FAQs, question 19. [PCI Security Standards Council], PCI DSS FAQs, question 20. [PCI Security Standards Council], PCI DSS FAQs, question 21. [PCI Security Standards Council], PCI DSS FAQs, question 22. [PCI Security Standards Council], PCI DSS FAQs, question 23. [PCI Security Standards Council], PCI DSS FAQs, question 24. [PCI Security Standards Council], PCI DSS FAQs, question 25. [PCI Security Standards Council], PCI DSS FAQs, question 26. [PCI Security Standards Council], PCI DSS FAQs, question 27. [PCI Security Standards Council], PCI DSS FAQs, question 28. [PCI Security Standards Council], PCI DSS FAQs, question 29. [PCI Security Standards Council], PCI DSS FAQs, question 30. [PCI Security Standards Council]

If cadets are using company phone numbers to make unsolicited calls, and the logs confirm the numbers are not being spoofed, it suggests that the SIP (Session Initiation Protocol) server's security settings might be weak. This could allow unauthorized access or exploitation of the company's telephony services, potentially leading to misuse by unauthorized individuals.

References = CompTIA Security+ SY0-701 study materials, especially on SIP security and common vulnerabilities​​.

The least privilege principle states that users and processes should only have the minimum level of access required to perform their tasks. This helps to prevent unauthorized or unnecessary actions that could compromise security. In this case, the patch transfer might be failing because the user or process does not have the appropriate permissions to access the critical system or the network resources needed for the transfer. Applying the least privilege principle can help to avoid this issue by granting the user or process the necessary access rights for the patching activity. References: CompTIA Security+ Study Guide: Exam SY0-701, 9th Edition, page 931