Eccouncil 312-49 Exam - Topic 1 Question 72 Discussion

Actual exam question for Eccouncil's 312-49 exam

Question #: 72
Topic #: 1

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:

AThreat hunting

BThreat analysis

CStatic analysis

DDynamic analysis

Show Suggested Answer

Suggested Answer: D

by Myra at Nov 14, 2024, 12:07 PM

Limited Time Offer

25%

Off

Get Premium 312-49 Questions as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF

Contribute your Thoughts:

Submit Cancel

Devora

3 months ago

Nah, dynamic analysis is better for finding hidden stuff!

upvoted 0 times

...

Johnson

3 months ago

Threat hunting could work too, but static is safer.

upvoted 0 times

...

Tawna

3 months ago

Wait, can static analysis really uncover all IOCs?

upvoted 0 times

...

Ngoc

4 months ago

Totally agree, static analysis avoids code execution risks!

upvoted 0 times

...

Whitley

4 months ago

I think static analysis is the way to go here.

upvoted 0 times

...

Mitsue

4 months 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.

upvoted 0 times

...

Shala

4 months ago

I feel like dynamic analysis is out of the question since it involves running the code, which we want to avoid.

upvoted 0 times

...

Reita

4 months 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.

upvoted 0 times

...

Lenna

5 months ago

I think static analysis might be the right choice here since it allows us to examine the code without executing it.

upvoted 0 times

...

Adolph

5 months 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.

upvoted 0 times

...

Aretha

5 months 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.

upvoted 0 times

...

Brynn

5 months 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.

upvoted 0 times

...

Amina

5 months 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.

upvoted 0 times

...

Rickie

1 year ago

But wouldn't threat hunting be more proactive in identifying potential threats?

upvoted 0 times

...

Daisy

1 year ago

I agree with Zana, static analysis can uncover hidden indicators of compromise without executing any code.

upvoted 0 times

...

Geoffrey

1 year 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.

upvoted 0 times

Darrin

1 year ago

Static analysis is a good choice for uncovering hidden indicators of compromise.

upvoted 0 times

...

Stevie

1 year ago

I think dynamic analysis can be risky if not done carefully.

upvoted 0 times

...

Fletcher

1 year ago

Threat hunting could also be useful in this situation.

upvoted 0 times

...

Lenny

1 year ago

I agree, static analysis is definitely the safer option.

upvoted 0 times

...

Izetta

1 year 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?

upvoted 0 times