New Year Sale 2026! 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
3 months ago
Really? I doubt IRIX would be unresponsive.
upvoted 0 times
...
Laquita
3 months ago
Wait, I thought all systems would react to that scan?
upvoted 0 times
...
Judy
3 months ago
Nah, D should respond fine.
upvoted 0 times
...
Andra
4 months ago
I think B might not respond either.
upvoted 0 times
...
Janessa
4 months ago
A is definitely the one that won't respond.
upvoted 0 times
...
Haydee
4 months ago
I thought RedHat was pretty standard and would respond normally, but I could be wrong about that.
upvoted 0 times
...
Pearlie
4 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
4 months ago
I think Solaris might have some quirks with XMAS scans, but I can't recall the specifics.
upvoted 0 times
...
Cordelia
5 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
5 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
5 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
5 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
5 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
5 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
5 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
9 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
8 months ago
D) RedHat Linux 8.0 running Apache Web Server
upvoted 0 times
...
Essie
8 months ago
C) Any version of IRIX
upvoted 0 times
...
Yoko
8 months ago
B) Any Solaris version running SAMBA Server
upvoted 0 times
...
Margo
8 months ago
A) Windows 2000 Server running IIS 5
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Anna
9 months 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
8 months ago
Yeah, I agree. Solaris with SAMBA might not be affected by an nmap XMAS scan.
upvoted 0 times
...
Clemencia
9 months ago
I think the Solaris version running SAMBA Server would not respond correctly.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lourdes
9 months ago
True, Windows 2000 Server is quite outdated.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Sabine
10 months 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
9 months ago
C) Any version of IRIX
upvoted 0 times
...
Joseph
9 months ago
B) Any Solaris version running SAMBA Server
upvoted 0 times
...
Brock
10 months ago
A) Windows 2000 Server running IIS 5
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Lindy
10 months 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
8 months ago
Yeah, I agree. IRIX could be a vulnerable system in this scenario.
upvoted 0 times
...
Ilene
8 months ago
I think IRIX might not respond correctly to the XMAS scan.
upvoted 0 times
...
Mabel
8 months ago
It's definitely an interesting combination to consider.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lauran
8 months ago
I'm not sure if SAMBA on Solaris would handle the XMAS scan correctly.
upvoted 0 times
...
Mammie
8 months ago
D) RedHat Linux 8.0 running Apache Web Server
upvoted 0 times
...
Lashandra
9 months ago
C) Any version of IRIX
upvoted 0 times
...
Barbra
9 months ago
B) Any Solaris version running SAMBA Server
upvoted 0 times
...
Henriette
10 months ago
A) Windows 2000 Server running IIS 5
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Casie
10 months 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
9 months ago
User 2
upvoted 0 times
...
King
9 months ago
User 1
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Jacob
10 months ago
I disagree, I think RedHat Linux 8.0 running Apache Web Server would not respond correctly.
upvoted 0 times
...
Nikita
11 months ago
I agree with Carla, Windows systems are known to not respond well to XMAS scans.
upvoted 0 times
...
Carla
11 months ago
I think Windows 2000 Server running IIS 5 would not respond correctly.
upvoted 0 times
...

Save Cancel