ISC2 CISSP Exam Questions

Adding a new rule to the application layer firewall is the most suited to quickly implement a control for an input validation and exception handling vulnerability on a critical web-based system. An input validation and exception handling vulnerability is a type of vulnerability that occurs when a web-based system does not properly check, filter, or sanitize the input data that is received from the users or other sources, or does not properly handle the errors or exceptions that are generated by the system. An input validation and exception handling vulnerability can lead to various attacks, such as:

Injection attacks, such as SQL injection, command injection, or cross-site scripting (XSS), where the attacker inserts malicious code or commands into the input data that are executed by the system or the browser, resulting in data theft, data manipulation, or remote code execution.

Buffer overflow attacks, where the attacker sends more input data than the system can handle, causing the system to overwrite the adjacent memory locations, resulting in data corruption, system crash, or arbitrary code execution.

Denial-of-service (DoS) attacks, where the attacker sends malformed or invalid input data that cause the system to generate excessive errors or exceptions, resulting in system overload, resource exhaustion, or system failure.

An application layer firewall is a device or software that operates at the application layer of the OSI model and inspects the application layer payload or the content of the data packets. An application layer firewall can provide various functions, such as:

Filtering the data packets based on the application layer protocols, such as HTTP, FTP, or SMTP, and the application layer attributes, such as URLs, cookies, or headers.

Blocking or allowing the data packets based on the predefined rules or policies that specify the criteria for the application layer protocols and attributes.

Logging and auditing the data packets for the application layer protocols and attributes.

Modifying or transforming the data packets for the application layer protocols and attributes.

Adding a new rule to the application layer firewall is the most suited to quickly implement a control for an input validation and exception handling vulnerability on a critical web-based system, because it can prevent or reduce the impact of the attacks by filtering or blocking the malicious or invalid input data that exploit the vulnerability. For example, a new rule can be added to the application layer firewall to:

Reject or drop the data packets that contain SQL statements, shell commands, or script tags in the input data, which can prevent or reduce the injection attacks.

Reject or drop the data packets that exceed a certain size or length in the input data, which can prevent or reduce the buffer overflow attacks.

Reject or drop the data packets that contain malformed or invalid syntax or characters in the input data, which can prevent or reduce the DoS attacks.

Adding a new rule to the application layer firewall can be done quickly and easily, without requiring any changes or patches to the web-based system, which can be time-consuming and risky, especially for a critical system. Adding a new rule to the application layer firewall can also be done remotely and centrally, without requiring any physical access or installation on the web-based system, which can be inconvenient and costly, especially for a distributed system.

The other options are not the most suited to quickly implement a control for an input validation and exception handling vulnerability on a critical web-based system, but rather options that have other limitations or drawbacks. Blocking access to the service is not the most suited option, because it can cause disruption and unavailability of the service, which can affect the business operations and customer satisfaction, especially for a critical system. Blocking access to the service can also be a temporary and incomplete solution, as it does not address the root cause of the vulnerability or prevent the attacks from occurring again. Installing an Intrusion Detection System (IDS) is not the most suited option, because IDS only monitors and detects the attacks, and does not prevent or respond to them. IDS can also generate false positives or false negatives, which can affect the accuracy and reliability of the detection. IDS can also be overwhelmed or evaded by the attacks, which can affect the effectiveness and efficiency of the detection. Patching the application source code is not the most suited option, because it can take a long time and require a lot of resources and testing to identify, fix, and deploy the patch, especially for a complex and critical system. Patching the application source code can also introduce new errors or vulnerabilities, which can affect the functionality and security of the system. Patching the application source code can also be difficult or impossible, if the system is proprietary or legacy, which can affect the feasibility and compatibility of the patch.

A Host-Based Intrusion Protection (HIPS) system is a software that monitors and blocks malicious activities on a single host, such as a computer or a server.A HIPS system can also prevent unauthorized changes to the system configuration, files, or registry12

During the initial implementation, a HIPS system is often deployed in monitoring or learning mode, which means that it observes the normal behavior of the system and the applications running on it, without blocking or alerting on any events.The objective of starting in this mode is to automatically create exceptions for specific actions or files that are legitimate and safe, but may otherwise trigger false alarms or unwanted blocks by the HIPS system34

By creating exceptions, the HIPS system can reduce the number of false positives and improve its accuracy and efficiency. However, the monitoring or learning mode should not last too long, as it may also expose the system to potential attacks that are not detected or prevented by the HIPS system.Therefore, after a sufficient baseline of normal behavior is established, the HIPS system should be switched to a more proactive mode, such as alerting or blocking mode, which can actively respond to suspicious or malicious events

The type of risk that is related to the sequences of value-adding and managerial activities undertaken in an organization is process risk. Process risk is the risk that arises from the inefficiency, inadequacy, or failure of the processes that are performed by the organization to achieve its objectives and deliver its products or services. Process risk can affect the quality, performance, and security of the organization's outputs and outcomes, and can result in financial, operational, or reputational losses or damages. Process risk can be caused by various factors, such as human errors, system errors, design flaws, compliance issues, or external events.Process risk can be managed by implementing and monitoring the process controls, such as policies, procedures, standards, or metrics, that ensure the effectiveness, efficiency, and reliability of the processes34.Reference:CISSP CBK, Fifth Edition, Chapter 2, page 122;2024 Pass4itsure CISSP Dumps, Question 8.

The type of SOC report that should be utilized to outline the security and availability of a particular system over a 12-month period is SOC 2 Type 2. SOC 2 Type 2 is a security audit report that provides information about the design and the operating effectiveness of the controls at a service organization relevant to the security and availability trust service categories, as well as the other trust service categories such as processing integrity, confidentiality, and privacy. SOC 2 Type 2 is the type of SOC report that should be utilized to outline the security and availability of a particular system over a 12-month period, because it can:

Evaluate and assess the design and the effectiveness of the controls that the service organization has implemented and maintained for ensuring the security and availability of the system and the data that are used for providing the services or the solutions to the user entities or the customers, based on the criteria or the principles of the Trust Services Categories (TSC).

Provide and present the information and the data about the service organization's system and the controls in relation to the security and availability, in the form of the audit report or the opinion that is prepared and issued by the independent auditor or the practitioner, and that is intended for the general or the restricted use of the user entities and the other interested or relevant parties or stakeholders.

Cover a specified period of time, usually between six and twelve months, and include the description of the tests of controls and the results performed by the auditor, to demonstrate the operational effectiveness of the controls over the security and availability of the system and the data.

The other options are not the types of SOC report that should be utilized to outline the security and availability of a particular system over a 12-month period. SOC 1 Type 1 is a security audit report that provides information about the design of the controls at a service organization relevant to the internal control over financial reporting of the user entities or the customers, based on the control objectives defined by the service organization. SOC 1 Type 1 is not the type of SOC report that should be utilized to outline the security and availability of a particular system over a 12-month period, because it does not:

Evaluate and assess the effectiveness of the controls that the service organization has implemented and maintained for ensuring the security and availability of the system and the data, but rather the controls that affect the financial reporting of the user entities or the customers.

Provide and present the information and the data about the service organization's system and the controls in relation to the security and availability, but rather the controls in relation to the internal control over financial reporting of the user entities or the customers.

Cover a specified period of time, or include the description of the tests of controls and the results performed by the auditor, but rather evaluate the design of the controls at a point in time.

SOC 2 Type 1 is a security audit report that provides information about the design of the controls at a service organization relevant to the security and availability trust service categories, as well as the other trust service categories such as processing integrity, confidentiality, and privacy. SOC 2 Type 1 is not the type of SOC report that should be utilized to outline the security and availability of a particular system over a 12-month period, because it does not:

Evaluate and assess the effectiveness of the controls that the service organization has implemented and maintained for ensuring the security and availability of the system and the data, but rather the design of the controls at a point in time.

Include the description of the tests of controls and the results performed by the auditor, to demonstrate the operational effectiveness of the controls over the security and availability of the system and the data.

SOC 3 Type 1 is a security audit report that provides information about the design of the controls at a service organization relevant to the security and availability trust service categories, as well as the other trust service categories such as processing integrity, confidentiality, and privacy. SOC 3 Type 1 is not the type of SOC report that should be utilized to outline the security and availability of a particular system over a 12-month period, because it does not:

Evaluate and assess the effectiveness of the controls that the service organization has implemented and maintained for ensuring the security and availability of the system and the data, but rather the design of the controls at a point in time.

Include the description of the tests of controls and the results performed by the auditor, to demonstrate the operational effectiveness of the controls over the security and availability of the system and the data.

Provide and present the information and the data about the service organization's system and the controls in relation to the security and availability, in the form of the audit report or the opinion, but rather in the form of the seal or the logo that indicates the compliance with the TSC.

The (ISC)* Code of Ethics is a set of principles and guidelines that govern the professional and ethical conduct of (ISC)* certified members and associates. The Code of Ethics consists of four mandatory canons, which are: Protect society, the common good, necessary public trust and confidence, and the infrastructure. Act honorably, honestly, justly, responsibly, and legally. Provide diligent and competent service to principals. Advance and protect the profession. The canon that is most reflected when preserving the value of systems, applications, and entrusted information while avoiding conflicts of interest is the second one: act honorably, honestly, justly, responsibly, and legally. This canon requires the (ISC)* certified members and associates to uphold the highest standards of integrity, fairness, responsibility, and lawfulness in their professional activities. This includes preserving the value of the systems, applications, and entrusted information that they work with, and avoiding any conflicts of interest that may compromise their objectivity, impartiality, or loyalty. The other canons are not as directly related to the scenario as the second one, although they may also have some relevance. The first canon: protect society, the common good, necessary public trust and confidence, and the infrastructure, requires the (ISC)* certified members and associates to safeguard the public interest, the common welfare, and the critical infrastructure from harm or misuse. This includes protecting the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the systems, applications, and entrusted information that they work with, and reporting any incidents or breaches that may affect them. The third canon: provide diligent and competent service to principals, requires the (ISC)* certified members and associates to serve their clients, employers, or stakeholders with diligence and competence. This includes delivering quality work, meeting the expectations and requirements, and respecting the rights and interests of the principals. The fourth canon: advance and protect the profession, requires the (ISC)* certified members and associates to promote and enhance the information security profession. This includes maintaining and improving their knowledge and skills, sharing their expertise and experience, and adhering to the Code of Ethics and the professional standards.Reference:CISSP All-in-One Exam Guide, Eighth Edition, Chapter 1: Security and Risk Management, p. 24-25.Official (ISC)2 CISSP CBK Reference, Fifth Edition, Domain 1: Security and Risk Management, p. 19-20.