Exactprep 212-89 Questions

Nation-state attribution involves identifying a specific country or government as the sponsor behind a cyber-attack or intrusion. This type of threat attribution is focused on determining the involvement of state actors in cyber operations against specific targets, which often involves sophisticated, well-planned, and executed cyber campaigns. Alexis's efforts to identify and attribute the actors behind the attack to a specific nation-state fall under this category, as she seeks to uncover the geopolitical motives and the extent of state sponsorship behind the incident. Nation-state attribution requires analyzing a variety of indicators, including technical evidence, tactics, techniques, and procedures (TTPs), and contextual intelligence. This is distinct from campaign attribution, which focuses on linking attacks to a specific campaign or operation, true attribution, which aims at identifying the actual individuals behind an attack, and intrusion set attribution, which involves attributing a set of malicious activities to a particular threat actor or group.

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation (ECIH-aligned):

This incident involves adaptive malware embedded within an AI system, actively evolving its behavior. The ECIH malware incident handling methodology prioritizes containment and eradication of the threat before recovery actions. Restoring data without removing the malware risks immediate reinfection and continued manipulation.

Option B is correct because deploying the AI-security module directly targets the malware’s adaptive mechanisms, allowing responders to detect, contain, and eradicate the malicious logic within the AI environment. ECIH emphasizes using appropriate, context-aware security controls that match the technology stack involved in the incident. For AI-driven environments, specialized tools are necessary to counter threats that traditional controls may not detect.

Option A is premature and unsafe prior to eradication. Option C disrupts business operations without resolving the threat. Option D is a communication step that should follow containment and validation.

Therefore, neutralizing the evolved malware using the AI-security module is the correct primary step.

The correct sequence to examine the originating IP address of emails involves first accessing the email's header to locate the IP address, then using external resources to investigate that address further. The steps are as follows:

Step 2:Open the email to trace and find its header. This is the initial step because the header contains valuable information about the email's journey across the internet, including the originating IP address.

Step 3:Collect the IP address of the sender from the header of the received mail. This detail is crucial for the next steps in the investigation.

Step 1:Search for the IP in the WHOIS database. This database can provide information about the owner of the IP address, including the ISP and sometimes the geographic location.

Step 4:Look for the geographic address of the sender in the WHOIS database. With the IP address information obtained from the WHOIS search, the geographic location or the originating country of the email can often be deduced, contributing to the analysis of the email's legitimacy.

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation (ECIH-aligned):

This incident involves malware embedded within third-party modifications, affecting financial data and game integrity. The ECIH malware handling framework prioritizes rapid containment to prevent further exploitation before analysis or public communication.

Option B is correct because disabling all mods immediately stops the malicious mod from continuing to operate, preventing additional data theft and financial abuse. This action contains the threat across the entire user base quickly and uniformly.

Option A focuses on detection and removal but may miss distributed instances already in use. Option C is a communication step that should follow containment. Option D delays action and allows continued exploitation.

ECIH stresses that when malware is actively impacting users at scale, containment actions that reduce attack surface globally are preferred. Disabling all mods is the fastest and safest initial containment measure, making Option B correct.