Quality CISSP PDF Dumps – CISSP Exam Questions [Q881-Q899]

WEP is designed to prevent the violation of the confidentiality of data transmitted over the wireless LAN. Another feature of WEP is to prevent unauthorized access to the network. The other answers are protocols in the Wireless Application Protocol, the security.

Section: Mixed questions

Explanation/Reference:
Explanation:
Asynchronous start-stop is the physical layer used to connect computers to modems for many dial-up Internet access applications, using a data link framing protocol.
Incorrect Answers:
B: Dial-up modems use Asynchronous, not synchronous, communication.
C: Dial-up modems connect to a remote system using communication, not interaction.
D: Dial-up modems connect to a remote system using communication, not interaction.
References:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asynchronous_serial_communication

The correct answer is “An iterated block cipher”. Answers A recursive, sequential cipher, A Feistel
network, and As treaming block cipher are distracters; however,
answer A Feistel network characterizes the Data Encryption Standard (DES) cipher.

Recovery controls are intended to bring the environment back to regular operations
For your exam you should know below information about different security controls
Deterrent Controls
Deterrent Controls are intended to discourage a potential attacker. Access controls act as a deterrent to threats and attacks by the simple fact that the existence of the control is enough to keep some potential attackers from attempting to circumvent the control. This is often because the effort required to circumvent the control is far greater than the potential reward if the attacker is successful, or, conversely, the negative implications of a failed attack (or getting caught) outweigh the benefits of success. For example, by forcing the identification and authentication of a user, service, or application, and all that it implies, the potential for incidents associated with the system is significantly reduced because an attacker will fear association with the incident. If there are no controls for a given access path, the number of incidents and the potential impact become infinite. Controls inherently reduce exposure to risk by applying oversight for a process. This oversight acts as a deterrent, curbing an attacker’s appetite in the face of probable repercussions.
The best example of a deterrent control is demonstrated by employees and their propensity to intentionally perform unauthorized functions, leading to unwanted events.
When users begin to understand that by authenticating into a system to perform a function, their activities are logged and monitored, and it reduces the likelihood they will attempt such an action. Many threats are based on the anonymity of the threat agent, and any potential for identification and association with their actions is avoided at all costs.
It is this fundamental reason why access controls are the key target of circumvention by attackers. Deterrents also take the form of potential punishment if users do something unauthorized. For example, if the organization policy specifies that an employee installing an unauthorized wireless access point will be fired, that will determine most employees from installing wireless access points.
Preventative Controls
Preventive controls are intended to avoid an incident from occurring. Preventative access controls keep a user from performing some activity or function. Preventative controls differ from deterrent controls in that the control is not optional and cannot (easily) be bypassed.
Deterrent controls work on the theory that it is easier to obey the control rather than to risk the consequences of bypassing the control. In other words, the power for action resides with the user (or the attacker). Preventative controls place the power of action with the system, obeying the control is not optional. The only way to bypass the control is to find a flaw in the control’s implementation.
Compensating Controls
Compensating controls are introduced when the existing capabilities of a system do not support the requirement of a policy. Compensating controls can be technical, procedural, or managerial. Although an existing system may not support the required controls, there may exist other technology or processes that can supplement the existing environment, closing the gap in controls, meeting policy requirements, and reducing overall risk.
For example, the access control policy may state that the authentication process must be encrypted when performed over the Internet. Adjusting an application to natively support encryption for authentication purposes may be too costly. Secure Socket Layer (SSL), an encryption protocol, can be employed and layered on top of the authentication process to support the policy statement.
Other examples include a separation of duties environment, which offers the capability to isolate certain tasks to compensate for technical limitations in the system and ensure the security of transactions. In addition, management processes, such as authorization, supervision, and administration, can be used to compensate for gaps in the access control environment.
Detective Controls
Detective controls warn when something has happened, and are the earliest point in the post-incident timeline. Access controls are a deterrent to threats and can be aggressively utilized to prevent harmful incidents through the application of least privilege. However, the detective nature of access controls can provide significant visibility into the access environment and help organizations manage their access strategy and related security risk.
As mentioned previously, strongly managed access privileges provided to an authenticated user offer the ability to reduce the risk exposure of the enterprise’s assets by limiting the capabilities that authenticated user has. However, there are few options to control what a user can perform once privileges are provided. For example, if a user is provided write access to a file and that file is damaged, altered, or otherwise negatively impacted (either deliberately or unintentionally), the use of applied access controls will offer visibility into the transaction. The control environment can be established to log activity regarding the identification, authentication, authorization, and use of privileges on a system.
This can be used to detect the occurrence of errors, the attempts to perform an unauthorized action, or to validate when provided credentials were exercised. The logging system as a detective device provides evidence of actions (both successful and unsuccessful) and tasks that were executed by authorized users.
Corrective Controls
When a security incident occurs, elements within the security infrastructure may require corrective actions. Corrective controls are actions that seek to alter the security posture of an environment to correct any deficiencies and return the environment to a secure state. A security incident signals the failure of one or more directive, deterrent, preventative, or compensating controls. The detective controls may have triggered an alarm or notification, but now the corrective controls must work to stop the incident in its tracks. Corrective controls can take many forms, all depending on the particular situation at hand or the particular security failure that needs to be dealt with.
Recovery Controls
Any changes to the access control environment, whether in the face of a security incident or to offer temporary compensating controls, need to be accurately reinstated and returned to normal operations. There are several situations that may affect access controls, their applicability, status, or management.
Events can include system outages, attacks, project changes, technical demands, administrative gaps, and full-blown disaster situations. For example, if an application is not correctly installed or deployed, it may adversely affect controls placed on system files or even have default administrative accounts unknowingly implemented upon install.
Additionally, an employee may be transferred, quit, or be on temporary leave that may affect policy requirements regarding separation of duties. An attack on systems may have resulted in the implantation of a Trojan horse program, potentially exposing private user information, such as credit card information and financial data. In all of these cases, an undesirable situation must be rectified as quickly as possible and controls returned to normal operations.
The following answers are incorrect:
Deterrent – Deterrent controls are intended to discourage a potential attacker
Preventive – Preventive controls are intended to avoid an incident from occurring
Corrective – Corrective control fixes components or systems after an incident has occurred
The following reference(s) were/was used to create this question:
CISA Review Manual 2014 Page number 44 and
Official ISC2 CISSP guide 3rd edition Page number 50 and 51

“Fixed spacing between connections” is referring to the fixed-sized insulation that separates the inner wire from the shielding.

Explanation/Reference:
Explanation:
A Tiger team is a team of attackers of a network. A Tiger team would never be part in a contingency plan.
Note: The contingency plan consists of a business continuity plan (BCP) and a Disaster Recovery Plan (DRP). The teams necessary for the DRP include:
Damage assessment team

The damage assessment team is responsible for determining the disaster’s cause and the amount of damage that has occurred to organizational assets.
Legal Affairs Team

The legal affairs team deals with all legal issues immediately following the disaster and during the disaster recovery.
Hardware Salvage team

The hardware salvage team recovers all assets at the disaster location and ensures that the primary site returns to normal. The hardware salvage team manages the cleaning of equipment, the rebuilding of the original facility, and identifies any experts to employ in the recovery process.

Explanation/Reference:
Explanation:
Hearsay evidence is not normally admissible in court unless it has firsthand evidence that can be used to prove the evidence’s accuracy, trustworthiness, and reliability like a business person who generated the computer logs and collected them. It is important that this person generates and collects logs as a normal part of his business and not just this one time for court. It has to be a documented process that is carried out daily. The value of evidence depends upon the genuineness and competence of the source; therefore, since record collection is not an activity likely to be performed by senior or executive management, records collected by senior or executive management are not likely to be admissible in court. Hearsay evidence is usually not admissible in court unless it meets the Business Records Exemption rule to the Hearsay evidence.
In certain instances computer records fall outside of the hearsay rule (e.g., business records

exemption)
Information relates to regular business activities

Automatically computer generated data

No human intervention

Prove system was operating correctly

Prove no one changed the data

If you have a documented business process and you make use of intrusion detection tools, log analysis tools, and you produce daily reports of activities, then the computer generated data might be admissible in court and would not be considered Hearsay Evidence.
References: HARRIS, Shon, All-In-One CISSP Certification Exam Guide, McGraw-Hill/Osborne, 2002, chapter 10: Law, Investigation, and Ethics (page 676)

The correct answer is reducing the amount of data to be evaluated by definition. Answer “Limit the number of letters in a password” is incorrect because clipping levels do not relate to letters in a password. Answer “Set thresholds for voltage variations” is incorrect because clipping levels in this context have nothing to do with controlling voltage levels. Answer “Limit errors in callback syste” is incorrect because they are not used to limit callback errors.

A firewall is primarily intended to prevent unauthorized access.

When we operate an organizational information system we are accepting a tolerable level of risk to allow the business functions to operate.
There may be risks you are not qualified to accept or risks you would be better off having undertaken by an outside entity.
A classic example is having your popular web server hosted by a web hosting agency which completely relieves you of the risks associated with that.
Another example is insurance where you offload the risk to an insurance agency and pay them to accept the risk.
When we transfer risk we are giving the risk to someone else to accept and it could be for a number of reasons. Expense primarily but it could also be performance, offers of better service elsewhere, legal reasons and other reasons.
The following answers are incorrect:
-Results of Cost Benefit Analysis: This might be involved in the process of Risk Mitigation but it isn’t part of Risk Transference. Sorry, wrong answer.
-Acceptance: This isn’t correct because accepting the risk is the opposite of transferring the risk to someone else.
-Not hosting the services at all: Sorry, this defines Risk Avoidance.
The following reference(s) was used to create this question: 2013. Official Security+ Curriculum.

The correct answer is “Procedures are step-by-step instructions for compliance with mandatory standards”. The other answers are incorrect.

The Prototype Phase is also called the “Proof of Concept” Phase. Whether it’s called one or the other depends on what the creator is trying to “prove.” If the main deliverable of the Phase includes a working version of the product’s technical features, it’s a “prototype.” If the main deliverable just looks like it has the product’s technical features, then it’s a “proof of concept.” Prototypes can save time and money because you can test some functionality earlier in the process. You don’t have to make the whole final product to begin testing it.

TLS is discussed in the answer to question 5. WTLS has to incorporate
functionality that is provided for in TLS by TCP in the TCP/IP
Protocol suite in that WTLS can operate over UDP. WTLS supports
data privacy, authentication and integrity. Because WTLS has to
incorporate a large number of handshakes when security is implemented,
significant delays may occur. During a WTLS handshake
session, WTLS can set up the following security classes:
Class 1. No certificates
Class 2. The client does not have a certificate; the server has a
certificate
Class 3. The client and server have certificates