New Year Sale 2026! Hurry Up, Grab the Special Discount - Save 25% - Ends In 00:00:00 Coupon code: SAVE25
Welcome to Pass4Success

- Free Preparation Discussions
Mail Us support@pass4success.com
Location US
Mob_nav_barsMENU

Eccouncil 212-89 Exam - Topic 2 Question 53 Discussion

Actual exam question for Eccouncil's 212-89 exam
Question #: 53
Topic #: 2
[All 212-89 Questions]

Which of the following methods help incident responders to reduce the false-positive

alert rates and further provide benefits of focusing on topmost priority issues reducing

potential risk and corporate liabilities?

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: A

by Lorean at Apr 11, 2024, 11:09 AM

Limited Time Offer

25%

Off

Get Premium 212-89 Questions as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF

Contribute your Thoughts:

0/2000 characters
Submit Cancel
Corazon
3 months ago
Not sure about that, seems a bit far-fetched to me.
upvoted 0 times
...
Claudio
3 months ago
Wait, can threat attribution really help with false positives?
upvoted 0 times
...
Madalyn
3 months ago
Totally agree with threat correlation being crucial!
upvoted 0 times
...
Ernie
4 months ago
I think threat contextualization is more effective.
upvoted 0 times
...
Regenia
4 months ago
Threat profiling is key for reducing false positives!
upvoted 0 times
...
Shawnna
4 months ago
I feel like threat contextualization is the best choice here. It seems to focus on prioritizing issues effectively, which aligns with reducing corporate liabilities.
upvoted 0 times
...
Sherly
4 months ago
I'm a bit confused about threat profiling versus threat attribution. They both seem relevant, but I can't recall which one specifically reduces false positives.
upvoted 0 times
...
Nichelle
4 months ago
I remember practicing a question similar to this, and I think threat correlation was emphasized as a way to reduce false positives.
upvoted 0 times
...
Juliann
5 months ago
I think threat contextualization might be the right answer since it helps in understanding the context of alerts better, but I'm not completely sure.
upvoted 0 times
...
Yolando
5 months ago
I feel pretty confident about this one. Based on my understanding, threat contextualization seems like the most relevant approach for reducing false positives and prioritizing the most important security issues. The other options don't seem to address those specific goals as directly.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lizbeth
5 months ago
Okay, I've got a strategy for this. I'll start by eliminating any options that don't seem directly relevant to the question. Then I'll focus on understanding the key differences between the remaining choices to determine the best answer.
upvoted 0 times
...
Celestine
5 months ago
Hmm, this is a tricky one. I'm not entirely sure about the differences between threat profiling, contextualization, correlation, and attribution. I'll need to think through each option carefully to decide which one is the most effective for reducing false positives and focusing on high-priority issues.
upvoted 0 times
...
Ernie
5 months ago
This question seems to be asking about methods that can help incident responders reduce false-positive alerts and prioritize the most important issues. I think I'll need to carefully consider the differences between the answer choices to determine the best approach.
upvoted 0 times
...
Celeste
5 months ago
Okay, let's see. The key requirements here are centralized management, faster outage detection, and easy integration with TAC. Based on that, I think Cisco Intersight is the way to go. It's a cloud-based solution that should meet all those needs without requiring a lot of in-house scripting knowledge.
upvoted 0 times
...
Melodie
5 months ago
I think I know this one. The Deny Write List function can be used to prevent users from modifying certain files, and to generate reports of denied access attempts. Those are the two functions I would select.
upvoted 0 times
...
Ashton
5 months ago
Hmm, I'm a bit confused. The question mentions an Always On availability group, so I'm not sure if the COPY_ONLY option is the best approach. Maybe we should consider the File_Snapshot option in option C instead, as that might be more appropriate for an availability group scenario.
upvoted 0 times
...
Billye
5 months ago
Agile development in monolithic apps seems too tricky. I recall practicing a question that highlighted deployment duration, but I'm confused if that's the main issue.
upvoted 0 times
...
Martina
5 months ago
Key phrase is 'influence an official act' - that sounds exactly like the definition of bribery to me. I'll go with option C.
upvoted 0 times
...
Sarah
2 years ago
Threat attribution helps in understanding the origin of threats.
upvoted 0 times
...
Pete
2 years ago
I believe threat profiling is important to reduce potential risks.
upvoted 0 times
...
Christene
2 years ago
Yes, threat contextualization provides a broader view of the threats.
upvoted 0 times
...
Gregg
2 years ago
Threat contextualization can also help in focusing on priority issues.
upvoted 0 times
...
Sarah
2 years ago
I agree with Christene, threat correlation can prioritize topmost issues.
upvoted 0 times
...
Christene
2 years ago
I think threat correlation helps in reducing false-positive alert rates.
upvoted 0 times
...
Gregoria
2 years ago
I see your point, but I still stand by C) Threat correlation because it helps to connect the dots and prioritize the most critical issues.
upvoted 0 times
...
Ayesha
2 years ago
I personally think A) Threat profiling is the best option to reduce false positives.
upvoted 0 times
...
Adelina
2 years ago
But wouldn't threat contextualization help in understanding the context of the threat and reduce false positives?
upvoted 0 times
...
Berry
2 years ago
I disagree, I believe it's C) Threat correlation.
upvoted 0 times
...
Adelina
2 years ago
I think the answer is B) Threat contextualization.
upvoted 0 times
...
Delsie
2 years ago
Haha, nice one! But seriously, this is an important issue. Reducing those false positives is like finding a needle in a haystack, but with the right tools and techniques, it can make a huge difference in the effectiveness of the incident response team.
upvoted 0 times
...
Carissa
2 years ago
Haha, I'm just imagining the incident responders doing a little dance every time they manage to reduce a false-positive alert. 'Threat contextualization, threat correlation - who's your daddy now, false positives?'
upvoted 0 times
...
Felton
2 years ago
You're right, threat attribution is more about identifying the attackers, which is valuable information but doesn't necessarily help with this specific problem. I'd go with B, C, and D as the best choices here.
upvoted 0 times
...
Casey
2 years ago
Hmm, I'm not sure about threat attribution. Isn't that more about identifying the actors behind the threats? While that information can be useful, I'm not sure it's as directly relevant to reducing false-positive alerts as the other options.
upvoted 0 times
Na
2 years ago
Threat profiling can help incident responders focus on the most critical issues.
upvoted 0 times
...
Chandra
2 years ago
Threat contextualization also plays a crucial role in prioritizing issues effectively.
upvoted 0 times
...
Franchesca
2 years ago
I think threat correlation is key to reducing false-positive alerts.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Vesta
2 years ago
I agree, those three methods seem to be the most effective in addressing the problem. Threat profiling helps us understand the patterns and characteristics of the threats we're dealing with, while contextualization and correlation allow us to put those threats into the bigger picture and identify the ones that pose the greatest risk.
upvoted 0 times
...
Yvonne
2 years ago
This is a great question! Reducing false-positive alerts is crucial for incident responders, as it allows them to focus on the truly important issues and minimize the risk and liabilities for the organization. I think a combination of threat profiling, contextualization, and correlation would be the best approach here.
upvoted 0 times
...

Save Cancel