There are two types of honeypots- high and low interaction. Which of these describes a low interaction honeypot? Select the best answers.
Suggested Answer: A, C, D, E
Get Premium CPEH-001 Questions
as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF
Real Exam Format
Detailed Explanations
Instant Access
Get Your Practice Test
12 comments · newest first
LU
Luke
12 months ago
Really? I’m surprised they don’t get hacked more often.
CA
Carmelina
12 months ago
Yeah, but they’re still useful for production.
CH
Chantell
12 months ago
I thought low interaction ones were more detectable?
TO
Toshia
1 year ago
Totally agree, they're easier to set up!
JO
Joanne
1 year ago
Low interaction honeypots use emulators, right?
JO
Jose
1 year ago
I feel like low interaction honeypots are definitely easier to set up, but I wonder if that makes them less effective in some cases.
TA
Tammi
1 year ago
I practiced a question like this before, and I think low interaction honeypots are used for production, but I’m confused about the part regarding research.
AL
Alline
1 year ago
I remember that low interaction honeypots use emulators, but I can't recall if they are more likely to be penetrated or not.
JA
Jarod
1 year ago
I think low interaction honeypots are easier to deploy and maintain, but I'm not entirely sure if they are more detectable.
JA
Jade
1 year ago
Okay, I think I've got it. The correct calculation is W x 1.732, which is option B. I'm feeling confident about this one.
IL
Iluminada
1 year ago
Hmm, I'm a bit confused. The question mentions "development" measures, but I'm not sure if that's the same as testing approaches. I'll have to think this through carefully.
BO
Bobbye
1 year ago
I'm not completely sure, but I feel like the CPU on these switches might not handle I/O the same way as in servers, which could be a reason for not needing iostat.