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

Microsoft GH-500 Exam - Topic 1 Question 17 Discussion

-- [Configure and Use Code Scanning]After investigating a code scanning alert related to injection, you determine that the input is properly sanitized using custom logic. What should be your next step?
D) Dismiss the alert with the reason 'false positive.'
A) Draft a pull request to update the open-source query.
B) Ignore the alert.
C) Open an issue in the CodeQL repository.

Microsoft GH-500 Exam - Topic 1 Question 17 Discussion

Actual exam question for Microsoft's GH-500 exam
Question #: 17
Topic #: 1
[All GH-500 Questions]

-- [Configure and Use Code Scanning]

After investigating a code scanning alert related to injection, you determine that the input is properly sanitized using custom logic. What should be your next step?

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: D

When you identify that a code scanning alert is a false positive---such as when your code uses a custom sanitization method not recognized by the analysis---you should dismiss the alert with the reason 'false positive.' This action helps improve the accuracy of future analyses and maintains the relevance of your security alerts.

As per GitHub's documentation:

'If you dismiss a CodeQL alert as a false positive result, for example because the code uses a sanitization library that isn't supported, consider contributing to the CodeQL repository and improving the analysis.'

By dismissing the alert appropriately, you ensure that your codebase's security alerts remain actionable and relevant.


by Willow at Jun 19, 2026, 11:59 PM

Limited Time Offer

25%

Off

Get Premium GH-500 Questions as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF

Contribute your Thoughts:

0/2000 characters
Submit Cancel
Emmanuel
23 days ago
B seems risky. Ignoring it might lead to issues later.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lang
29 days ago
I lean towards A. Updating the query could help others.
upvoted 0 times
...
Micaela
1 month ago
I think D is the best choice. It's a false positive.
upvoted 0 times
...
In
1 month ago
Wait, are we sure it's really sanitized? Sounds risky to just dismiss it!
upvoted 0 times
...
Andree
1 month ago
C could be useful for future reference, though.
upvoted 0 times
...
Tamar
2 months ago
But what if the custom logic has hidden flaws? Shouldn't we investigate further?
upvoted 0 times
...
Darell
2 months ago
Agree with D, no need to clutter the repo with unnecessary issues.
upvoted 0 times
...
Jillian
2 months ago
I think D is the way to go since it's a false positive.
upvoted 0 times
...
Alona
2 months ago
I remember discussing the importance of documenting why we dismiss alerts. I think option D makes sense, but I wonder if we should also notify someone about the custom logic.
upvoted 0 times
...
Desire
2 months ago
I’m a bit confused here. Should we really ignore the alert, or is there a better way to handle it? I feel like dismissing it might be too hasty.
upvoted 0 times
...
Latia
3 months ago
This seems similar to a practice question we did about handling alerts. I feel like opening an issue could be a good way to contribute back to the community.
upvoted 0 times
...
Salome
3 months ago
I think I remember that if the input is sanitized, we might need to dismiss the alert, but I'm not sure if "false positive" is the right reason.
upvoted 0 times
...

Save Cancel