Eccouncil 212-82 Exam - Topic 12 Question 43 Discussion

Actual exam question for Eccouncil's 212-82 exam

Question #: 43
Topic #: 12

Karter, a security professional, deployed a honeypot on the organization's network for luring attackers who attempt to breach the network. For this purpose, he configured a type of honeypot that simulates a real OS as well as the applications and services of a target network. Furthermore, the honeypot deployed by Karter only responds to pre-configured commands.

Identify the type of Honeypot deployed by Karter in the above scenario.

ALow-interaction honeypot

BPure honeypot

CMedium-interaction honeypot

DHigh-interaction honeypot

Show Suggested Answer

Suggested Answer: B

The number of files in the ''Sensitive Corporate Documents'' folder is 4. This can be verified by initiating a remote connection to the target machine from the ''Attacker Machine-1'' using Theef client. Theef is a Remote Access Trojan (RAT) that allows an attacker to remotely control a victim's machine and perform various malicious activities. To connect to the target machine using Theef client, one can follow these steps:

Launch Theef client from Z:CCT-ToolsCCT Module 01 Information Security Threats and VulnerabilitiesRemote Access Trojans (RAT)Theef on the ''Attacker Machine-1''.

Enter the IP address of the target machine (20.20.10.26) and click on Connect.

Wait for a few seconds until a connection is established and a message box appears saying ''Connection Successful''.

Click on OK to close the message box and access the remote desktop of the target machine.

Navigate to the Documents directory and locate the ''Sensitive Corporate Documents'' folder.

Open the folder and count the number of files in it. The screenshot below shows an example of performing these steps: Reference: [Theef Client Tutorial], [Screenshot of Theef client showing remote desktop and folder]

by Deonna at Oct 22, 2024, 04:27 AM

Limited Time Offer

25%

Off

Get Premium 212-82 Questions as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF

Contribute your Thoughts:

Submit Cancel

Trina

3 months ago

Pretty clever setup, but I’m surprised it only uses pre-configured commands!

upvoted 0 times

...

Nicolette

3 months ago

Wait, are you sure? I thought high-interaction meant more real-time responses.

upvoted 0 times

...

Elke

3 months ago

Definitely low-interaction, it only responds to commands.

upvoted 0 times

...

Lynelle

4 months ago

I think it's a high-interaction honeypot!

upvoted 0 times

...

Jody

4 months ago

Sounds like a medium-interaction honeypot to me.

upvoted 0 times

...

Tawna

4 months ago

I feel like I saw a practice question similar to this, and it was about how high-interaction honeypots allow for more in-depth interaction with attackers.

upvoted 0 times

...

Lorrine

4 months ago

This sounds like a high-interaction honeypot to me because it responds to commands, but I might be mixing it up with medium-interaction.

upvoted 0 times

...

Susana

4 months ago

I remember studying that low-interaction honeypots only simulate basic services, so it can't be that one.

upvoted 0 times

...

Ming

5 months ago

I think Karter's honeypot is a medium-interaction honeypot since it simulates a real OS and applications, but I'm not entirely sure.

upvoted 0 times

...

Quentin

5 months ago

Based on the description, a low-interaction honeypot seems like the best fit. It simulates the OS and services, but has a restricted set of responses.

upvoted 0 times

...

Isabelle

5 months ago

I'm a little confused by the wording here. Does "pre-configured commands" mean it has limited functionality? I'll have to weigh the options carefully.

upvoted 0 times

...

Youlanda

5 months ago

Okay, the key details are that the honeypot simulates a real OS and only responds to pre-configured commands. I think that points to a low-interaction honeypot.

upvoted 0 times

...

Sylvia

5 months ago

Hmm, I'm a bit unsure about the differences between the honeypot types. I'll need to think this through carefully.

upvoted 0 times

...

Olene

5 months ago

This seems like a straightforward question about honeypot types. I'm pretty confident I can identify the right answer here.

upvoted 0 times

...

Lanie

9 months ago

A low-interaction honeypot, for sure. Karter's not messing around, he's keeping it simple and secure. I bet the attackers will be like, 'Wait, this is it? I thought hacking was supposed to be fun!'

upvoted 0 times

Isidra

8 months ago

D) High-interaction honeypot

upvoted 0 times

...

Tora

8 months ago

Definitely, it's the best choice for this scenario.

upvoted 0 times

...

Alton

8 months ago

A) Low-interaction honeypot

upvoted 0 times

...

Pearlie

8 months ago

Nah, that would be too risky. Karter's playing it smart with low-interaction.

upvoted 0 times

...

Sylvie

8 months ago

B) Pure honeypot

upvoted 0 times

...

Dean

9 months ago

Exactly, Karter knows what he's doing. Better safe than sorry.

upvoted 0 times

...

Natalya

9 months ago

A) Low-interaction honeypot

upvoted 0 times

...

Kirk

9 months ago

Aha! This is a classic low-interaction honeypot. Karter's playing it safe, but at least the attackers will have a fun time with those pre-configured commands. Hopefully, they'll get stuck in an infinite loop or something.

upvoted 0 times

Rosalia

8 months ago

It's smart to have that extra layer of security with pre-configured commands in place.

upvoted 0 times

...

Cecilia

8 months ago

Yeah, Karter definitely knows what he's doing by using a low-interaction honeypot.

upvoted 0 times

...

Troy

9 months ago

I agree, low-interaction honeypots are a great way to gather information without risking too much.

upvoted 0 times

...

Lonny

10 months ago

Hmm, I'd say it's a medium-interaction honeypot. Simulating the OS and apps sounds more advanced than a low-interaction one.

upvoted 0 times

Alisha

8 months ago

That makes sense. It could be a medium-interaction honeypot then, since it's not as complex as a high-interaction one.

upvoted 0 times

...

Jennifer

9 months ago

I agree with you, it does sound more advanced. But I think it's a medium-interaction honeypot because it simulates the OS and apps.

upvoted 0 times

...

Deeanna

9 months ago

I think it's a high-interaction honeypot. It responds to pre-configured commands, which sounds pretty advanced.

upvoted 0 times

...

Nichelle

10 months ago

I think it is a low-interaction honeypot because it only responds to pre-configured commands.

upvoted 0 times

...

Selma

10 months ago

I disagree with Ryan. I believe it is a medium-interaction honeypot because it simulates real OS and applications.

upvoted 0 times

...

Trina

10 months ago

Definitely a low-interaction honeypot. It simulates the OS and services, but only responds to pre-configured commands. No way it's a high-interaction one!

upvoted 0 times

Oliva

10 months ago

Yeah, it makes sense since it only responds to pre-configured commands.

upvoted 0 times

...

Dahlia

10 months ago

I agree, it's definitely a low-interaction honeypot.

upvoted 0 times

...

Ryan

10 months ago

I think the type of honeypot deployed by Karter is a high-interaction honeypot.

upvoted 0 times

...