Want to practice some free EC-Council 312-50v11 exam questions? You can study the following EC-Council 312-50v11 exam online questions. Killtest provides 522 Q&As for EC-Council 312-50v11 exam, which has been proven effective in the 312-50v11 exam preparation. Besides, you can get full payment fee refund if you fail 312-50v11 exam by using Killtest 312-50v11 practice exam questions. Ready? Go!
EC-Council 312-50v11 Online Practice Exam Questions
The questions of 312-50v11 were last updated on Apr 22,2024 .
Viewing page 1 out of 45 pages.
Viewing questions 1 out of 228 questions
When considering how an attacker may exploit a web server, what is web server footprinting?
which of the following information security controls creates an appealing isolated environment for hackers to prevent them from compromising critical targets while simultaneously gathering information about the hacker?
Explanation: A honeypot may be a trap that an IT pro lays for a malicious hacker, hoping that they will interact with it during a way that gives useful intelligence. It’s one among the oldest security measures in IT, but beware: luring hackers onto your network, even on an isolated system, are often a dangerous game. Honeypot may be a good starting place: “A honeypot may be a computer or computing system intended to mimic likely targets of cyberattacks.” Often a honeypot are going to be deliberately configured with known vulnerabilities in situation to form a more tempting or obvious target for attackers. A honeypot won’t contain production data or participate in legitimate traffic on your network ― that’s how you’ll tell anything happening within it’s a results of an attack. If someone’s stopping by, they’re up to no good. That definition covers a various array of systems, from bare-bones virtual machines that only offer a couple of vulnerable systems to ornately constructed fake networks spanning multiple servers. and therefore the goals of these who build honeypots can vary widely also, starting from defense thorough to academic research. additionally, there’s now an entire marketing category of deception technology that, while not meeting the strict definition of a honeypot, is certainly within the same family. But we’ll get thereto during a moment. Honeypots aim to permit close analysis of how hackers do their dirty work. The team controlling the honeypot can watch the techniques hackers use to infiltrate systems, escalate privileges, and otherwise run amok through target networks. These sorts of honeypots are found out by security companies, academics, and government agencies looking to look at the threat landscape. Their creators could also be curious about learning what kind of attacks are out there, getting details on how specific sorts of attacks work, or maybe trying to lure a specific hackers within the hopes of tracing the attack back to its source. These systems are often inbuilt fully isolated lab environments, which ensures that any breaches don’t end in non-honeypot machines falling prey to attacks. Production honeypots, on the opposite hand, are usually deployed in proximity to some organization’s production infrastructure, though measures are taken to isolate it the maximum amount as possible. These honeypots often serve both as bait to distract hackers who could also be trying to interrupt into that organization’s network, keeping them faraway from valuable data or services; they will also function a canary within the coalpit, indicating that attacks are underway and are a minimum of partially succeeding.
Andrew is an Ethical Hacker who was assigned the task of discovering all the active devices hidden by a restrictive firewall in the IPv4 range in a given target network. Which of the following host discovery techniques must he use to perform the given task?
Explanation: One of the most common Nmap usage scenarios is scanning an Ethernet LAN. Most LANs, especially those that use the private address range granted by RFC 1918, do not always use the overwhelming majority of IP addresses. When Nmap attempts to send a raw IP packet, such as an ICMP echo request, the OS must determine a destination hardware (ARP) address, such as the target IP, so that the Ethernet frame can be properly addressed. .. This is required to issue a series of ARP requests. This is best illustrated by an example where a ping scan is attempted against an Area Ethernet host. The Csend-ip option tells Nmap to send IP-level packets (rather than raw Ethernet), even on area networks. The Wireshark output of the three ARP requests and their timing have been pasted into the session. Raw IP ping scan example for offline targets This example took quite a couple of seconds to finish because the (Linux) OS sent three ARP requests at 1 second intervals before abandoning the host. Waiting for a few seconds is excessive, as long as the ARP response usually arrives within a few milliseconds. Reducing this timeout period is not a priority for OS vendors, as the overwhelming majority of packets are sent to the host that actually exists. Nmap, on the other hand, needs to send packets to 16 million IP s given a target like 10.0.0.0/8. Many targets are pinged in parallel, but waiting 2 seconds each is very delayed. There is another problem with raw IP ping scans on the LAN. If the destination host turns out to be unresponsive, as in the previous example, the source host usually adds an incomplete entry for that destination IP to the kernel ARP table. ARP tablespaces are finite and some operating systems become unresponsive when full. If Nmap is used in rawIP mode (Csend-ip), Nmap may have to wait a few minutes for the ARP cache entry to expire before continuing host discovery. ARP scans solve both problems by giving Nmap the highest priority. Nmap issues raw ARP requests and handles retransmissions and timeout periods in its sole discretion. The system ARP cache is bypassed. The example shows the difference. This ARP scan takes just over a tenth of the time it takes for an equivalent IP. Example b ARP ping scan of offline target In example b, neither the -PR option nor the -send-eth option has any effect. This is often because ARP has a default scan type on the Area Ethernet network when scanning Ethernet hosts that Nmap discovers. This includes traditional wired Ethernet as 802.11 wireless networks. As mentioned above, ARP scanning is not only more efficient, but also more accurate. Hosts frequently block IP-based ping packets, but usually cannot block ARP requests or responses and communicate over the network. Nmap uses ARP instead of all targets on equivalent targets, even if different ping types (such as -PE and -PS) are specified. LAN.. If you do not need to attempt an ARP scan at all, specify Csend-ip as shown in Example a “Raw IP Ping Scan for Offline Targets”. If you give Nmap control to send raw Ethernet frames, Nmap can also adjust the source MAC address. If you have the only PowerBook in your security conference room and a large ARP scan is initiated from an Apple-registered MAC address, your head may turn to you. Use the Cspoof-mac option to spoof the MAC address as described in the MAC Address Spoofing section.
Switches maintain a CAM Table that maps individual MAC addresses on the network to physical ports on the switch. In MAC flooding attack, a switch is fed with many Ethernet frames, each containing different source MAC addresses, by the attacker. Switches have a limited memory for mapping various MAC addresses to physical ports . What happens when the CAM table becomes full?
To invisibly maintain access to a machine, an attacker utilizes a toolkit that sits undetected In the core components of the operating system . What is this type of rootkit an example of?
Explanation: Kernel-mode rootkits run with the best operating system privileges (Ring 0) by adding code or replacement parts of the core operating system, as well as each the kernel and associated device drivers. Most operative systems support kernel-mode device drivers, that execute with a similar privileges because the software itself. As such, several kernel-mode rootkits square measure developed as device drivers or loadable modules, like loadable kernel modules in Linux or device drivers in Microsoft Windows. This category of rootkit has unrestricted security access, however is tougher to jot down. The quality makes bugs common, and any bugs in code operative at the kernel level could seriously impact system stability, resulting in discovery of the rootkit. one amongst the primary wide familiar kernel rootkits was developed for Windows NT four.0 and discharged in Phrack magazine in 1999 by Greg Hoglund. Kernel rootkits is particularly tough to observe and take away as a result of they operate at a similar security level because the software itself, and square measure therefore able to intercept or subvert the foremost sure software operations. Any package, like antivirus package, running on the compromised system is equally vulnerable. during this scenario, no a part of the system is sure.
Exam Code: 312-50v11Q & A: 522 Q&AsUpdated: Apr 22,2024
[email protected]
GMT+8: Mon-Sat 8:00-18:00
GMT: Mon-Sat 0:00-10:00