Deal of The Day! 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 312-39 Exam - Topic 10 Question 79 Discussion

Actual exam question for Eccouncil's 312-39 exam
Question #: 79
Topic #: 10
[All 312-39 Questions]

Which of the following can help you eliminate the burden of investigating false positives?

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: B

by Levi at Apr 19, 2024, 07:32 PM

Limited Time Offer

25%

Off

Get Premium 312-39 Questions as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF

Contribute your Thoughts:

0/2000 characters
Submit Cancel
Carin
4 months ago
B is a must! Can't trust everything blindly.
upvoted 0 times
...
Kimi
5 months ago
Really? I doubt that just ingesting context data solves everything.
upvoted 0 times
...
Aleisha
5 months ago
Totally agree with D! Context data makes a huge difference.
upvoted 0 times
...
Shawn
5 months ago
Not sure about A, keeping default rules can be risky.
upvoted 0 times
...
Francesco
5 months ago
D is definitely the way to go! Context is key.
upvoted 0 times
...
Tegan
6 months ago
Keeping default rules doesn't sound like a good strategy to me. I feel like that would just keep the noise level high.
upvoted 0 times
...
Alonso
6 months ago
I practiced a question similar to this, and I think not trusting the security devices could be a valid approach, but it seems risky.
upvoted 0 times
...
Rhea
6 months ago
I'm not entirely sure, but I feel like treating every alert as high level could lead to more confusion. That might not help at all.
upvoted 0 times
...
Arlie
6 months ago
I think I remember something about context data being really important for reducing false positives. Maybe option D is the right choice?
upvoted 0 times
...
Desire
6 months ago
I'm leaning towards D as well. Gathering more context around the alerts is crucial for being able to properly investigate and triage them. The other options don't really address the root issue of false positives.
upvoted 0 times
...
Barney
6 months ago
D seems like the best option to me. Ingesting the context data around the alerts can provide valuable information to differentiate between real threats and false positives. The other choices don't seem as effective.
upvoted 0 times
...
Malcom
6 months ago
I'm pretty sure the answer is D. Ingesting the context data is key to reducing false positives and getting a better understanding of the alerts.
upvoted 0 times
...
Hubert
6 months ago
Hmm, I'm a bit confused on this one. I'm not sure if keeping default rules or treating every alert as high level would really help eliminate false positives. I'll have to think this through carefully.
upvoted 0 times
...
Stevie
6 months ago
Okay, let me break this down. The key point seems to be that the State Repository pattern allows you to "defer state from memory to a state repository" during those long periods of inactivity in complex compositions. So I think the passage is saying that's why it's a core part of the Enterprise Service Bus pattern. I'll go with True on this one.
upvoted 0 times
...
Dino
6 months ago
Hmm, this seems straightforward. I think the key is to monitor the cluster, not individual VMs, since the question asks about monitoring all VMs in a specific host cluster.
upvoted 0 times
...
Bok
6 months ago
I think the answer is Stream. That's the Microsoft 365 service that allows you to upload and manage videos, and it has automatic transcription capabilities.
upvoted 0 times
...
Desmond
11 months ago
I'm not a fan of option C. Treating every alert as high level? That's like trying to put out a campfire with a fire hose. Talk about overkill. Give me some contextual data any day!
upvoted 0 times
Janine
10 months ago
I always prioritize context data over everything else. It's the most efficient way to handle alerts.
upvoted 0 times
...
Ashlyn
11 months ago
Context data is key. It helps you focus on what really matters and avoid wasting time on false positives.
upvoted 0 times
...
Veronique
11 months ago
I agree, option C does seem a bit excessive. Contextual data is definitely the way to go.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Ronny
12 months ago
D all the way, baby! Ingesting that context data is the key to unlocking the secrets of the false positive realm. Plus, it's way more fun than, like, not trusting your security devices (B). Where's the challenge in that?
upvoted 0 times
Tess
10 months ago
D) Ingesting the context data
upvoted 0 times
...
Lemuel
10 months ago
C) Treating every alert as high level
upvoted 0 times
...
Jules
10 months ago
B) Not trusting the security devices
upvoted 0 times
...
Jacquline
11 months ago
A) Keeping default rules
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Felicia
12 months ago
I don't know, man. Keeping the default rules (A) sounds like a recipe for disaster. You gotta customize that stuff, you know? But D is probably the safest bet.
upvoted 0 times
...
Eva
12 months ago
I believe treating every alert as high level is also important to avoid missing any potential threats.
upvoted 0 times
...
Trina
12 months ago
I was thinking C at first, but that seems a bit heavy-handed. Treating every alert as high level would just create more work for us. D is definitely the way to go.
upvoted 0 times
Ceola
11 months ago
Yeah, ingesting the context data will definitely help us streamline the investigation process.
upvoted 0 times
...
Devorah
11 months ago
I agree, D is the best option to eliminate false positives.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Santos
12 months ago
Hmm, I'm pretty sure the answer is D. Ingesting the context data seems like the best way to reduce false positives. Anything that gives you more information to work with is a win in my book.
upvoted 0 times
...
Josphine
12 months ago
I agree with Josphinebie, ingesting context data provides more information to accurately assess alerts.
upvoted 0 times
...
Bobbie
1 year ago
I think ingesting the context data can help eliminate false positives.
upvoted 0 times
...

Save Cancel