312-85 Exam Dumps : Certified Threat Intelligence Analyst (CTIA)

Tracy, as a Chief Information Security Officer (CISO), requires intelligence that aids in understanding broader business and cybersecurity trends, making informed decisions regarding new technologies, security budgets, process improvements, and staffing. This need aligns with the role of a strategic user of threat intelligence. Strategic users leverage intelligence to guide long-term planning and decision-making, focusing on minimizing business risks and safeguarding against emerging threats to new technology and business initiatives. This type of intelligence is less about the technical specifics of individual threats and more about understanding the overall threat landscape, regulatory environment, and industry trends to inform high-level strategy and policy.

In the Threat Hunting Maturity Model (HMM), Level 2: Procedural represents an organization that has developed a structured but partially manual threat-hunting capability.

At this stage, organizations:

Use threat intelligence from open and closed sources to guide hunts.

Search for anomalies or suspicious activity across their network.

Employ open-source tools and basic scripts for analysis.

Depend on analysts following documented procedures rather than automated systems.

Why the Other Options Are Incorrect:

Level 1: Minimal: Organization relies solely on reactive security measures and lacks dedicated hunting capabilities.

Level 3: Innovative: Introduces automation and advanced analytics to support hunts.

Level 4: Leading: Represents full maturity with proactive, automated, intelligence-driven hunting integrated across all defenses.

Conclusion:

The organization described is operating at Level 2: Procedural in the Threat Hunting Maturity Model.

Final Answer: A. Level 2: Procedural

Explanation Reference (Based on CTIA Study Concepts):

According to CTIA’s framework on “Threat Hunting Maturity Levels,” Level 2 involves intelligence-driven, manual hunting using open-source tools and structured procedures.

Passive DNS monitoring involves collecting data about DNS queries and responses without actively querying DNS servers, thereby not altering or interfering with DNS traffic. This technique allows analysts to track changes in DNS records and observe patterns that may indicate malicious activity. In the scenario described, Enrique is employing passive DNS monitoring by using a recursive DNS server to log the responses received from name servers, storing these logs in a central database for analysis. This approach is effective for identifying malicious domains, mapping malware campaigns, and understanding threat actors' infrastructure without alerting them to the fact that they are being monitored. This method is distinct from active techniques such as DNS interrogation or zone transfers, which involve sending queries to DNS servers, and dynamic DNS, which refers to the automatic updating of DNS records.