Independence Day Deal! Unlock 25% OFF Today – Limited-Time Offer - Ends In 00:00:00 Coupon code: SAVE25
Welcome to Pass4Success

- Free Preparation Discussions

CertNexus Exam ITS-110 Topic 3 Question 41 Discussion

Actual exam question for CertNexus's ITS-110 exam
Question #: 41
Topic #: 3
[All ITS-110 Questions]

Which of the following is one way to implement countermeasures on an IoT gateway to ensure physical security?

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: D

Contribute your Thoughts:

Jesusa
1 months ago
Haha, Leslee's bear analogy is perfect. But I agree, A is the way to go. You can't just rely on software to keep your IoT gateway secure. Hardware-based security is the way to go.
upvoted 0 times
Lakeesha
2 days ago
I agree, hardware-based security is crucial for keeping things secure.
upvoted 0 times
...
Cathern
12 days ago
A) is definitely the way to go for physical security on an IoT gateway.
upvoted 0 times
...
Shaunna
15 days ago
B) Limit physical access to ports when possible
upvoted 0 times
...
William
20 days ago
A) Add tamper detection to the enclosure
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Merrilee
2 months ago
Hmm, I bet Leslee would try to keep the bear in the fridge as a security measure. But seriously, A seems like the way to go. Tamper detection is a must for these devices.
upvoted 0 times
Annelle
23 days ago
C) Allow quick administrator access for mitigation
upvoted 0 times
...
Willodean
1 months ago
B) Limit physical access to ports when possible
upvoted 0 times
...
Lynna
1 months ago
A) Add tamper detection to the enclosure
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Leslee
2 months ago
D is such a cop-out. Software-based security? Come on, that's like trying to keep a hungry bear out of your fridge with a cardboard box. Give me some good old-fashioned hardware security any day!
upvoted 0 times
...
Crista
2 months ago
I think B is the best choice here. Limiting physical access to the ports is crucial for IoT gateways. Who wants a hacker to just walk up and plug in a USB drive?
upvoted 0 times
Hubert
1 months ago
User 2
upvoted 0 times
...
Kiley
1 months ago
User 1
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Jacki
2 months ago
A and B sound like good options to prevent physical tampering. I'm not sure about C though, wouldn't that open up security vulnerabilities?
upvoted 0 times
...
Salley
2 months ago
I believe option B is also important to limit physical access.
upvoted 0 times
...
Felice
2 months ago
I agree with Bettina, tamper detection is crucial for physical security.
upvoted 0 times
...
Bettina
2 months ago
I think option A is the best choice.
upvoted 0 times
...

Save Cancel
az-700  pass4success  az-104  200-301  200-201  cissp  350-401  350-201  350-501  350-601  350-801  350-901  az-720  az-305  pl-300  

Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /pass.php:70) in /pass.php on line 77