312-49v11 Exam Dumps - Computer Hacking Forensic Investigator (CHFIv11)

This question aligns with CHFI v11 objectives underOperating System ForensicsandVolatile and Non-Volatile Data Analysis, particularly the recovery of artifacts from live memory and system files such aspagefile.sys. Private browsing modes (e.g., InPrivate, Incognito) are designed to minimize persistent artifacts on disk; however, CHFI v11 emphasizes thatmemory, page files, and swap files often retain remnants of browsing activity, including URLs, session data, cached content, and credentials.

FTK® Imageris a forensically sound tool widely used forlive data acquisition, memory capture, and analysis of volatile artifacts. It allows investigators to acquire RAM, pagefile.sys, hiberfil.sys, and other critical system files without altering evidence integrity. CHFI v11 specifically highlights FTK Imager as a preferred tool for collecting and examining live system data and recovering artifacts that are not available through traditional disk-only analysis.

PsLoggedOn is used to identify logged-in users, Exeinfo analyzes executable file formats, and zsteg is a steganography detection tool. None of these are suitable for live memory or pagefile analysis. Therefore, consistent with CHFI v11 forensic best practices,FTK® Imageris the correct tool to recover private browsing artifacts from live Windows systems.

According to theCHFI v11 Network and Web Attacksdomain, adirectory traversal attack(also known as path traversal) is a web-based attack in which an attacker manipulates input parameters (such as ../ sequences) to access files and directoriesoutside the intended web root. This can expose sensitive resources such as configuration files, credentials, source code, system files, and application logs.

Theprimary forensic objectivewhen investigating a directory traversal attack is todetermine the scope and impact of unauthorized access. CHFI v11 emphasizes that investigators must analyzeweb server logs, application logs, and access recordsto identify:

Which files or directories were accessed

Whether sensitive or confidential data was exposed

The time frame of the attack

The attacker’s source IP and request patterns

Whether data was viewed, downloaded, or potentially modified

Understanding theextent of data compromiseis critical for incident response, regulatory notification, damage assessment, and legal proceedings. It also helps determine whether further attacks (such as privilege escalation or lateral movement) may have occurred following the traversal exploit.

The other options are not aligned with forensic goals. Hardware configuration analysis and bandwidth optimization are operational tasks, not forensic objectives. Enhancing user experience is unrelated to incident investigation.

CHFI v11 clearly states that the focus of web attack forensics isimpact assessment and evidence reconstruction, makingdetermining unauthorized access and data compromisethe correct objective.

Therefore, the correct and CHFI v11–verified answer isOption C.

According to theCHFI v11 Regulations, Policies, and Ethicsmodule, theFreedom of Information Act (FOIA)is the primary U.S. federal law that governs an investigator’s right to request access to records held by government agencies. FOIA establishes a legal framework that promotestransparency and accountabilityby allowing investigators, journalists, and the public to obtain government records, subject to specific statutory exemptions.

CHFI v11 clearly explains that while FOIA provides broad access rights, it also includesnine exemptionsthat allow agencies to lawfully withhold information. One of the most significant and commonly invoked exemptions isExemption 1, which protects information related tonational security, including classified defense, intelligence, and foreign policy information. If disclosure of records could reasonably be expected to harm national security, agencies are legally permitted to deny access.

The other laws listed do not govern public or investigative access to government records in this manner. TheFederal Records Act of 1950focuses on records management and preservation, not disclosure rights. TheNational Information Infrastructure Protection Act of 1996addresses cybercrime offenses, and theProtect America Act of 2007relates to foreign intelligence surveillance authorities.

CHFI v11 emphasizes that forensic investigators must understandFOIA limitations and exemptionsto set realistic expectations during multi-agency investigations and to remain compliant with legal and ethical boundaries. Therefore, the correct and CHFI v11–verified answer isThe Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), makingOption Bcorrect.

According to the CHFI v11 objectives underData Acquisition,Digital Evidence, andImage/Evidence Examination, forensic investigators must be able to work with different disk image formats. TheE01 format(Expert Witness Format) is widely used in digital forensics because it supports compression, metadata storage, and integrity verification through hashing. However, many Linux-based forensic tools require the image to be mounted or accessed in araw (dd) formatfor direct analysis.

ewfmountis a Linux utility from thelibewftoolkit that allows investigators tomount E01 (and other EWF) images as raw disk images. Once mounted, the image appears as a raw device, enabling investigators to analyze partitions, file systems, and artifacts using standard forensic tools without altering the original evidence. This approach preserves forensic integrity and aligns with CHFI v11 best practices.

Autopsy (Option B) is a forensic analysis platform but does not perform E01-to-raw mounting itself. UFS Explorer (Option C) is a commercial forensic tool used for file system analysis, not image conversion. fdisk (Option D) is a disk partitioning utility and cannot mount or convert forensic image formats.

The CHFI Exam Blueprint v4 emphasizes properforensic image handling, validation, and analysis on Linux systems, makingewfmountthe correct, forensically sound, and exam-aligned tool for converting and mounting E01 images

According to the CHFI v11 objectives underMobile and IoT ForensicsandOperating System Forensics, mobile devices often act ascross-platform interaction points, storing artifacts related to communications, file transfers, backups, or synchronization withWindows and Linux systems. These artifacts may include shared documents, SSH keys, SMB access traces, USB connection records, cloud sync remnants, or application logs indicating interaction with external operating systems.

A crucial forensic step in such cases isanalyzing files to identify interactions and potential evidence across different operating systems. This enables investigators to reconstruct user activity beyond the mobile device itself and establish links between the mobile device and other systems involved in the incident. CHFI v11 emphasizes the importance ofcorrelating evidence across heterogeneous platformsto build a complete and accurate timeline of events.

Focusing only on native mobile files (Options B and C) risks overlooking critical evidence that may demonstrate lateral movement, data exfiltration, or coordination between devices. Ignoring Windows- or Linux-related artifacts (Option D) directly contradicts forensic best practices and may lead to incomplete or flawed conclusions.

The CHFI Exam Blueprint v4 explicitly highlightsAndroid and iOS forensic analysis,cross-platform evidence correlation, andfile system analysisas key competencies. Therefore, analyzing cross-OS artifacts is essential for uncovering hidden relationships, validating investigative hypotheses, and ensuring legally defensible findings, making Option A the correct and exam-aligned answer