MENU
An investigator Is examining a file to identify any potentially malicious content. To avoid code execution and still be able to uncover hidden indicators of compromise (IOC), which type of examination should the investigator perform:
Suggested Answer: D
Get Premium 312-49 Questions
as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF
Real Exam Format
Detailed Explanations
Instant Access
Get Your Practice Test
33 comments · newest first
DE
Devora
11 months ago
Nah, dynamic analysis is better for finding hidden stuff!
JO
Johnson
11 months ago
Threat hunting could work too, but static is safer.
TA
Tawna
11 months ago
Wait, can static analysis really uncover all IOCs?
NG
Ngoc
12 months ago
Totally agree, static analysis avoids code execution risks!
WH
Whitley
12 months ago
I think static analysis is the way to go here.
MI
Mitsue
1 year ago
Threat analysis sounds familiar, but I can't recall if it specifically relates to examining files for hidden IOCs. Static analysis seems more fitting.
SH
Shala
1 year ago
I feel like dynamic analysis is out of the question since it involves running the code, which we want to avoid.
RE
Reita
1 year ago
I'm not entirely sure, but I remember something about threat hunting being more about searching for active threats rather than examining files directly.
LE
Lenna
1 year ago
I think static analysis might be the right choice here since it allows us to examine the code without executing it.
AD
Adolph
1 year ago
I'm pretty confident the answer is C - static analysis. That's the best way to examine the file for potential malicious content without the risk of execution. The other options don't seem as well-suited for this scenario.
AR
Aretha
1 year ago
Okay, let's see here. The key is to avoid code execution, but still uncover indicators of compromise. I'm leaning towards D - dynamic analysis, since that would allow the investigator to observe the file's behavior without actually running it.
BR
Brynn
1 year ago
Hmm, I'm a bit unsure about this one. I'm debating between B - threat analysis and C - static analysis. I'll need to think through the differences between those two approaches more carefully.
AM
Amina
1 year ago
This seems like a straightforward question. I think the answer is C - static analysis. That way, the investigator can examine the file without actually executing any code, which would avoid potential risks.
RI
Rickie
2 years ago
But wouldn't threat hunting be more proactive in identifying potential threats?
DA
Daisy
2 years ago
I agree with Zana, static analysis can uncover hidden indicators of compromise without executing any code.
GE
Geoffrey
2 years ago
I'd have to go with C) Static analysis as well. Wouldn't want to end up like that guy who tried dynamic analysis and ended up with a computer that was more malware than machine.
DA
Darrin
2 years ago
Static analysis is a good choice for uncovering hidden indicators of compromise.
ST
Stevie
2 years ago
I think dynamic analysis can be risky if not done carefully.
FL
Fletcher
2 years ago
Threat hunting could also be useful in this situation.
LE
Lenny
2 years ago
I agree, static analysis is definitely the safer option.
IZ
Izetta
2 years ago
I'd have to agree with Janine on this one. Static analysis is the way to go if you want to avoid any nasty surprises. Definitely don't want to be the one who unleashes a virus on the system, right?
VI
Vicki
2 years ago
Let's stick with static analysis then, better safe than sorry.
HE
Heidy
2 years ago
I agree, we don't want to accidentally trigger anything harmful.
PE
Pedro
2 years ago
Static analysis is definitely the safest option.
AL
Alyce
2 years ago
D) Dynamic analysis
HA
Harrison
2 years ago
C) Static analysis
LO
Lonny
2 years ago
B) Threat analysis
JU
Justa
2 years ago
A) Threat hunting
ZA
Zana
2 years ago
I think the investigator should perform static analysis.
JA
Janine
2 years ago
C) Static analysis is definitely the way to go here. Gotta keep that code execution in check, you know?
LE
Lea
2 years ago
D) Dynamic analysis
JO
Jolanda
2 years ago
C) Static analysis
CE
Cecilia
2 years ago
A) Threat hunting