CompTIA CySA+ CS0-003 Passing Score

To identify existing vulnerabilities in the web application, the best options are to contract a penetration test and create a bug bounty program. A penetration test simulates attacks against the application to uncover security flaws proactively. A bug bounty program incentivizes external security researchers to find and report vulnerabilities, expanding the testing scope without overburdening internal resources. According to CompTIA CySA+, both methods are highly effective in identifying vulnerabilities from an external perspective, particularly when internal resources are limited. Options like a WAF (A) focus more on prevention than detection, while threat modeling (F) and tabletop exercises (D) are generally proactive measures not focused on active flaw identification.

Incident response playbooksprovide a structuredstep-by-step guidefor handling security incidents. Theydefine actions to takewhen specificthreat indicators or eventsoccur, ensuring acoordinated and consistent response​.

Option A (Prioritizing business-critical assets)relates more todisaster recovery (DR)than incident response.

Option C (Documenting asset management)is part ofIT governance, not incident response.

Option D (Defining DR sites)falls underbusiness continuity planning, not real-time incident handling.

Thus,B is the best answer, asplaybooks are designed to trigger appropriate responses to incidents​.

The correct answer is A. Orange team.

An orange team is a team that is involved in facilitation and training of other teams in cybersecurity. An orange team assists the yellow team, which is the management or leadership team that oversees the cybersecurity strategy and governance of an organization. An orange team helps the yellow team to understand the cybersecurity risks and challenges, as well as the roles and responsibilities of other teams, such as the red, blue, and purple teams12.

In this scenario, the analyst is conducting monitoring against an authorized team that will perform adversarial techniques. This means that the analyst is observing and evaluating the performance of another team that is simulating real-world attacks against the organization’s systems or networks. This could be either a red team or a purple team, depending on whether they are working independently or collaboratively with the defensive team345.

The analyst interacts with the team twice per day to set the stage for the techniques to be used. This means that the analyst is providing guidance and feedback to the team on how to conduct their testing and what techniques to use. This could also involve setting up scenarios, objectives, rules of engagement, and success criteria for the testing. This implies that the analyst is facilitating and training the team to improve their skills and capabilities in cybersecurity12.

Therefore, based on these descriptions, the analyst is a member of an orange team, which is involved in facilitation and training of other teams in cybersecurity.

The other options are incorrect because they do not match the role and function of the analyst in this scenario.

Option B is incorrect because a blue team is a defensive security team that monitors and protects the organization’s systems and networks from real or simulated attacks. A blue team does not conduct monitoring against an authorized team that will perform adversarial techniques, but rather defends against them345.

Option C is incorrect because a red team is an offensive security team that discovers and exploits vulnerabilities in the organization’s systems or networks by simulating real-world attacks. A red team does not conduct monitoring against an authorized team that will perform adversarial techniques, but rather performs them345.

Option D is incorrect because a purple team is not a separate security team, but rather a collaborative approach between the red and blue teams to improve the organization’s overall security. A purple team does not conduct monitoring against an authorized team that will perform adversarial techniques, but rather works with them345.

Step 1: Analyzing the SFTP Log

The SFTP log provides a record of file transfer and login activities:

User “sjames” logged in from several IP addresses:

192.168.10.32 and 192.168.10.37 (internal network IPs)

32.111.16.37 and 41.21.18.102 (external IPs)

We see file alterations in the /var/www directory, which is commonly the web directory.

Modified files: about_us.html, index.html

Suspicious activity:

192.168.11.102 and 41.21.18.102 modified the files.

32.111.16.37 had failed login attempts, indicating possible unauthorized access attempts.

The most suspicious IP here is 41.21.18.102, as it’s associated with direct file modifications, possibly indicating unauthorized access.

Step 2: Reviewing Netstat

The netstat output shows active connections and their states:

IP 41.21.18.102 has an ESTABLISHED connection with port 22, commonly used for SFTP.

IP 32.111.16.37 is also attempting connections, and 32.111.16.37 connections are in a TIME_WAIT state, showing prior connections were recently closed.

The netstat output reaffirms 41.21.18.102 is actively connected and potentially involved in malicious activities.

Step 3: Checking the HTTP Access Log

The HTTP Access log shows access to about_us.html:

32.111.16.37 repeatedly accessed /about_us.html with 404 errors, indicating attempts to reach non-existing pages.

41.21.18.102 accessed the 200 status code, showing successful page requests, but since this IP was modifying files directly on the server, it might be testing or verifying changes.

Again, 41.21.18.102 stands out as it matches both successful file modification and page request patterns, while 32.111.16.37 shows unsuccessful attempts.

Step 4: Selecting the IP of Concern

Based on the above analysis:

Answer: 41.21.18.102 should be the IP of concern due to its direct file modifications on critical web files (about_us.html, index.html).

Step 5: Identifying the Indicator of Compromise

Potential indicators include unauthorized file modifications:

Modified index.html file is the correct answer, as it indicates direct changes to website content and is often a clear sign of compromise.

Step 6: Selecting Corrective Actions

To mitigate and prevent further compromise:

Change the password on the “sjames” account: The account was used across various IPs, indicating potential account compromise.

Block external SFTP access: Restricting SFTP to internal IPs only would prevent unauthorized external modifications. Since 41.21.18.102 was external, this would stop similar threats.

Summary

IP of Concern: 41.21.18.102

Indicator of Compromise: Modified index.html file

Corrective Actions:

Change the password on the sjames account

Block external SFTP access

These selections address both the immediate security breach and implement a preventative measure against future unauthorized access.