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

GAQM CPEH-001 Exam - Topic 6 Question 98 Discussion

Actual exam question for GAQM's CPEH-001 exam
Question #: 98
Topic #: 6
[All CPEH-001 Questions]

Which of the following systems would not respond correctly to an nmap XMAS scan?

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: D

SYSKEY is a utility that encrypts the hashed password information in a SAM database using a 128-bit encryption key.


by Felix at Sep 15, 2024, 01:30 PM

Limited Time Offer

25%

Off

Get Premium CPEH-001 Questions as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF

Contribute your Thoughts:

0/2000 characters
Submit Cancel
Daryl
5 months ago
Really? I doubt IRIX would be unresponsive.
upvoted 0 times
...
Laquita
6 months ago
Wait, I thought all systems would react to that scan?
upvoted 0 times
...
Judy
6 months ago
Nah, D should respond fine.
upvoted 0 times
...
Andra
6 months ago
I think B might not respond either.
upvoted 0 times
...
Janessa
6 months ago
A is definitely the one that won't respond.
upvoted 0 times
...
Haydee
7 months ago
I thought RedHat was pretty standard and would respond normally, but I could be wrong about that.
upvoted 0 times
...
Pearlie
7 months ago
I practiced a similar question about OS responses to different scan types, and I feel like IRIX might not respond correctly either.
upvoted 0 times
...
Earleen
7 months ago
I think Solaris might have some quirks with XMAS scans, but I can't recall the specifics.
upvoted 0 times
...
Cordelia
7 months ago
I remember that Windows systems often respond differently to scans, but I'm not sure if it's specifically Windows 2000 Server.
upvoted 0 times
...
Kimbery
7 months ago
No problem, I've got this. The XMAS scan is designed to evoke specific responses from different operating systems. I just need to recall the behavior of each option presented.
upvoted 0 times
...
Jesusita
7 months ago
I'm a bit confused by the wording of the question. Does it want me to identify the system that would NOT respond correctly? Or the one that would? I'll have to read it over carefully.
upvoted 0 times
...
Kyoko
7 months ago
Ah, I remember learning about this in class. The key is understanding how the target systems handle the unusual TCP flag combination in the XMAS scan. I think I can work through this one.
upvoted 0 times
...
Cecil
7 months ago
Hmm, I'm not too familiar with the XMAS scan technique. I'll have to review my notes on network scanning to make sure I understand the differences between the various scan types.
upvoted 0 times
...
Erinn
7 months ago
This looks like a tricky question about network scanning. I'll need to think carefully about how different systems respond to the XMAS scan.
upvoted 0 times
...
Deandrea
7 months ago
I'm feeling pretty confident about this one. The key is that it's asking about on-premises services, so the answer has to be one of the SRV records. I'm going to go with B, the _cisco-uds._tls. SRV record.
upvoted 0 times
...
Clemencia
12 months ago
XMAS scan? Sounds like a festive way to test the systems. I wonder if any of them would respond with a 'Ho, ho, ho!' instead of an error.
upvoted 0 times
Anissa
10 months ago
D) RedHat Linux 8.0 running Apache Web Server
upvoted 0 times
...
Essie
10 months ago
C) Any version of IRIX
upvoted 0 times
...
Yoko
11 months ago
B) Any Solaris version running SAMBA Server
upvoted 0 times
...
Margo
11 months ago
A) Windows 2000 Server running IIS 5
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Anna
1 year ago
Windows 2000 Server with IIS 5? That's like a dinosaur in the IT world. I'm surprised that's even an option!
upvoted 0 times
Tran
11 months ago
Yeah, I agree. Solaris with SAMBA might not be affected by an nmap XMAS scan.
upvoted 0 times
...
Clemencia
11 months ago
I think the Solaris version running SAMBA Server would not respond correctly.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lourdes
11 months ago
True, Windows 2000 Server is quite outdated.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Sabine
1 year ago
RedHat Linux 8.0 with Apache? That's so last decade! I bet the newer versions of Linux would handle the XMAS scan better.
upvoted 0 times
Delfina
11 months ago
C) Any version of IRIX
upvoted 0 times
...
Joseph
12 months ago
B) Any Solaris version running SAMBA Server
upvoted 0 times
...
Brock
1 year ago
A) Windows 2000 Server running IIS 5
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Lindy
1 year ago
Solaris running SAMBA? That's an interesting combination. I wonder if the SAMBA server would be able to handle the XMAS scan properly.
upvoted 0 times
Francoise
11 months ago
Yeah, I agree. IRIX could be a vulnerable system in this scenario.
upvoted 0 times
...
Ilene
11 months ago
I think IRIX might not respond correctly to the XMAS scan.
upvoted 0 times
...
Mabel
11 months ago
It's definitely an interesting combination to consider.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lauran
11 months ago
I'm not sure if SAMBA on Solaris would handle the XMAS scan correctly.
upvoted 0 times
...
Mammie
11 months ago
D) RedHat Linux 8.0 running Apache Web Server
upvoted 0 times
...
Lashandra
11 months ago
C) Any version of IRIX
upvoted 0 times
...
Barbra
11 months ago
B) Any Solaris version running SAMBA Server
upvoted 0 times
...
Henriette
1 year ago
A) Windows 2000 Server running IIS 5
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Casie
1 year ago
I'm pretty sure the IRIX system would respond incorrectly to the XMAS scan. Isn't IRIX an outdated Unix variant that's no longer supported?
upvoted 0 times
Zack
12 months ago
User 2
upvoted 0 times
...
King
12 months ago
User 1
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Jacob
1 year ago
I disagree, I think RedHat Linux 8.0 running Apache Web Server would not respond correctly.
upvoted 0 times
...
Nikita
1 year ago
I agree with Carla, Windows systems are known to not respond well to XMAS scans.
upvoted 0 times
...
Carla
1 year ago
I think Windows 2000 Server running IIS 5 would not respond correctly.
upvoted 0 times
...

Save Cancel