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

A Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) is a formal agreement that outlines the roles and responsibilities of each party involved in a particular process or project, especially within security frameworks. In the context of cybersecurity, an MOU is commonly used to clarify and document the security responsibilities of different departments or entities involved. It helps ensure everyone understands their specific duties and contributions to security, which is crucial for coordination and risk management. According to CompTIA Security+ guidelines, while options A, C, and D describe other forms of agreements, they do not capture the essential purpose of an MOU as accurately as option B does.

The best practice that the company should follow with this proxy is to decommission the proxy. Decommissioning the proxy involves removing or disposing of the proxy from the rack and the network, as well as deleting or wiping any data or configuration on the proxy. Decommissioning the proxy can help eliminate the vulnerability on the proxy, as well as reduce the attack surface, complexity, or cost of maintaining the network. Decommissioning the proxy can also free up space or resources for other devices or systems that are in use or needed by the company.

A compensating control is an alternative measure that provides a similar level of protection as the original control, but is used when the original control is not feasible or cost-effective. In this case, the CISO should develop a compensating control to mitigate the risk of the vulnerability in the ACE software, such as implementing additional monitoring, firewall rules, or encryption, until the issue can be fixed permanently by the developers. References: CompTIA CySA+ Study Guide: Exam CS0-003, 3rd Edition, Chapter 5, page 197; CompTIA CySA+ CS0-003 Certification Study Guide, Chapter 5, page 205.

This log shows multiple 404 errors being triggered from requests to different directories or paths, which strongly suggests adirectory brute-force attack. In this type of attack, an adversary uses automated tools to enumerate directory or file paths in an attempt to find hidden or misconfigured resources. The frequent 404 “Not Found” HTTP responses from a single IP address attempting to access different URL paths is the signature pattern for directory brute-forcing. This behavior is not consistent with XSS, SQLi, or RCE, which would involve payloads or specific encoded commands, not merely probing paths.

Wiresharkis apacket capture and analysis toolthat allows analysts to inspect network traffic and detectcleartext credentialssent over protocols like HTTP, FTP, and Telnet​.

Option A (OpenVAS)is avulnerability scanner, not a network analysis tool.

Option B (Angry IP Scanner)identifiesactive hosts, but does not analyze packet contents.

Option D (Maltego)is used forOSINT and network reconnaissance, not packet inspection.

Thus,C (Wireshark) is the correct answer, as itcaptures and analyzes network packets to identify unencrypted passwords​.

This scenario describes a strictgovernance policyrequiring multiple approvals for high-risk security group changes.Organizational governancerefers to policies that enforce security controls and approval workflows​.

Option B (MOU - Memorandum of Understanding)refers to agreements between parties, not internal security processes.

Option C (SLA - Service Level Agreement)refers to service guarantees, not security governance.

Option D (Business process interruption)might be a consequence, but it is not the primaryinhibitor to remediationin this case.

Thus,A is correct, as governance rules are restricting remediation speed.

1. How many employees clicked on the link in the phishing email?

According to the email server logs, 25 employees clicked on the link in the phishing email.

2. On how many workstations was the malware installed?

According to the file server logs, the malware was installed on 15 workstations.

3. What is the executable file name of the malware?

The executable file name of the malware is svchost.EXE.

Answers

1. 25

2. 15

3. svchost.EXE

Command-and-control (C2) beaconing involves compromised systems communicating with an attacker’s server at regular intervals, often using HTTPS to blend in with legitimate traffic. This is indicative of a potential compromise where malware communicates back to a command center. The persistent nature of the connections after hours and throughout the day suggests automated beaconing, which is a tell-tale sign of C2 activity. According to CompTIA CySA+, this type of activity should raise immediate suspicion and warrants further investigation and containment. While options B, C, D, and E might indicate other issues, they do not fit the pattern described as well as option A.