NEW QUESTION 333 The BEST way to identify the risk associated with a social engineering attack is to:
The best way to identify the risk associated with a social engineering attack is to test user knowledge of information security practices. Social engineering is a type of attack that exploits human psychology and behavior to manipulate, deceive, or influence users into divulging sensitive information, granting unauthorized access, or performing malicious actions. Therefore, user knowledge of information security practices is a key factor that affects the likelihood and impact of a social engineering attack. By testing user knowledge of information security practices, such as through quizzes, surveys, or simulated attacks, the information security manager can measure the level of awareness, understanding, and compliance of the users, and identify the gaps, weaknesses, or vulnerabilities that need to be addressed. Monitoring the intrusion detection system (IDS) (A) is a possible way to detect a social engineering attack, but not to identify the risk associated with it. An IDS is a system that monitors network or system activities and alerts or responds to any suspicious or malicious events. However, an IDS may not be able to prevent or recognize all types of social engineering attacks, especially those that rely on human interaction, such as phishing, vishing, or baiting. Moreover, monitoring the IDS is a reactive rather than proactive approach, as it only reveals the occurrence or consequences of a social engineering attack, not the potential or likelihood of it. Reviewing single sign-on (SSO) authentication lags (B) is not a relevant way to identify the risk associated with a social engineering attack. SSO is a method of authentication that allows users to access multiple applications or systems with one set of credentials. Authentication lags are delays or failures in the authentication process that may affect the user experience or performance. However, authentication lags are not directly related to social engineering attacks, as they do not indicate the user’s knowledge of information security practices, nor the attacker’s attempts or success in compromising the user’s credentials or access. Performing a business risk assessment of the email filtering system (D) is also not a relevant way to identify the risk associated with a social engineering attack. An email filtering system is a system that scans, filters, and blocks incoming or outgoing emails based on predefined rules or criteria, such as spam, viruses, or phishing. A business risk assessment is a process that evaluates the potential threats, vulnerabilities, and impacts to the organization’s business objectives, processes, and assets. However, performing a business risk assessment of the email filtering system does not address the risk associated with a social engineering attack, as it only focuses on the technical aspects and performance of the system, not the human factors and behavior of the users. Reference = CISM Review Manual, 16th Edition, Chapter 2: Information Risk Management, Section: Risk Identification, Subsection: Threat Identification, page 87-881
NEW QUESTION 336 Which of the following is the MOST important issue in a penetration test?
Explanation The most important issue in a penetration test is having a defined goal as well as success and failure criteria. A penetration test is a simulated cyber attack against a computer system or an application to check for exploitable vulnerabilities. The goal of a penetration test is to identify and evaluate the security risks and weaknesses of the target system or application, and to provide recommendations for improvement. The success and failure criteria of a penetration test are the metrics and indicators that measure the effectiveness and efficiency of the test, and the extent to which the test achieves its goal. By having a defined goal as well as success and failure criteria, the penetration tester can plan and execute the test in a systematic and structured manner, and can communicate and report the results and findings in a clear and concise way. The other options are not the most important issue in a penetration test, although they may be some factors or considerations that affect the test. Having an independent group perform the test is a desirable practice, as it can provide an unbiased and objective assessment of the target system or application. However, it is not essential, as long as the penetration tester follows ethical hacking principles and standards. Obtaining permission from audit is a mandatory requirement, as it ensures that the penetration test is authorized and compliant with the organization’s policies and regulations. However, it is not an issue, as it is a prerequisite for conducting the test. Performing the test without the benefit of any insider knowledge is an optional approach, as it simulates a real-world attack by an external hacker who does not have access to the internal design or configuration of the target system or application. However, it is not always feasible or effective, as some vulnerabilities may be hidden or inaccessible from an outsider’s perspective.
NEW QUESTION 340 An internal audit has revealed that a number of information assets have been inappropriately classified. To correct the classifications, the remediation accountability should be assigned to:
The best automated control to resolve the issue of security incidents not being appropriately escalated by the help desk is to integrate incident response workflow into the help desk ticketing system. This will ensure that the help desk staff follow the predefined steps and procedures for handling and escalating security incidents, based on the severity, impact, and urgency of each incident. The incident response workflow will also provide clear guidance on who to notify, when to notify, and how to notify the relevant stakeholders and authorities. This will improve the efficiency, effectiveness, and consistency of the incident response process. Reference = CISM Review Manual, 16th Edition, page 2901; A Practical Approach to Incident Management Escalation2