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

Splunk SPLK-1003 Exam - Topic 10 Question 101 Discussion

Posted by Willard on Sep 13, 2024 at 02:29 PM

A security team needs to ingest a static file for a specific incident. The log file has not been collected previously and future updates to the file must not be indexed.

Which command would meet these needs?

Suggested Answer: A

The correct answer is A. splunk add one shot / opt/ incident [data . log ---index incident

According to the Splunk documentation1, the splunk add one shot command adds a single file or directory to the Splunk index and then stops monitoring it. This is useful for ingesting static files that do not change or update. The command takes the following syntax:

splunk add one shot <file> -index <index_name>

The file parameter specifies the path to the file or directory to be indexed. The index parameter specifies the name of the index where the data will be stored. If the index does not exist, Splunk will create it automatically.

Option B is incorrect because the splunk edit monitor command modifies an existing monitor input, which is used for ingesting files or directories that change or update over time. This command does not create a new monitor input, nor does it stop monitoring after indexing.

Option C is incorrect because the splunk add monitor command creates a new monitor input, which is also used for ingesting files or directories that change or update over time. This command does not stop monitoring after indexing.

Option D is incorrect because the splunk edit oneshot command does not exist. There is no such command in the Splunk CLI.


Get Premium SPLK-1003 Questions as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF Real Exam Format Detailed Explanations Instant Access Get Your Practice Test
31 comments · newest first
JO
Joseph 10 months ago
I agree with A, but why not just use the latest version of Splunk?
AN
Annice 11 months ago
Wait, can you really use "edit" in that context? Seems off.
RE
Rebeca 11 months ago
Definitely going with A, it’s a one-shot deal!
JE
Jestine 11 months ago
I think C is better since it monitors the file.
RU
Ruthann 11 months ago
Option A is the right command for a one-time ingestion.
CA
Caprice 12 months ago
I think `edit oneshot` might be a typo in the options. I need to double-check what `edit` does in this context.
CH
Chau 12 months ago
I feel like I saw a similar question where we had to specify the index correctly. I hope I remember the right command for this one.
KA
Karl 12 months ago
I think the `add monitor` command is for continuous monitoring, which doesn't fit since we only want to ingest this file once.
OZ
Ozell 1 year ago
I remember practicing with the `oneshot` command for static files, but I'm not sure if it's the right syntax here.
EL
Eliseo 1 year ago
I think option C is the way to go. The "add monitor" command will ingest the static file without indexing any future updates, which is exactly what the question is asking for. Seems like a straightforward Splunk administration question to me.
AN
Annmarie 1 year ago
I'm a little confused by the different options here. The wording of the question is a bit tricky, and I'm not entirely sure which command would be the most appropriate. I'll have to think about this one a bit more.
TA
Tanja 1 year ago
Okay, I've got this. The key is that the file hasn't been collected before and future updates shouldn't be indexed. So the "add one shot" command in option A seems like the best fit to meet those requirements.
HA
Harley 1 year ago
Hmm, I'm a bit unsure about this one. The question mentions that the file hasn't been collected previously, so I'm not sure if "edit monitor" would be the right approach. Let me re-read the question carefully and think this through.
JO
Joni 1 year ago
This looks like a straightforward Splunk command question. I think option C is the correct answer, as it uses the "add monitor" command to ingest the static log file without indexing future updates.
DE
Delmy 2 years ago
I'm not sure, but I think option B could also work because it mentions monitoring the file.
SA
Samuel 2 years ago
Haha, I bet the person who came up with option D was having a bit too much fun with the question. But C looks like the clear winner here.
FA
Fabiola 2 years ago
↳ replying to Samuel
Definitely, option C is the way to go for ingesting the static file.
AN
Annelle 2 years ago
↳ replying to Samuel
I think we can safely go with option C for this scenario.
EV
Evan 2 years ago
↳ replying to Samuel
Yeah, option D does seem a bit off, haha.
JE
Jennifer 2 years ago
↳ replying to Samuel
I agree, option C seems like the most appropriate choice.
CA
Carry 2 years ago
I agree with Charlene, option C seems like the correct command.
SU
Sunshine 2 years ago
Option A seems a bit too specific, and D doesn't have the right syntax. I'm going with C as well.
RE
Rene 2 years ago
↳ replying to Sunshine
Let's go with C to ensure the file is ingested correctly without future updates being indexed.
RA
Rasheeda 2 years ago
↳ replying to Sunshine
I agree, C seems like the best option for this scenario.
DE
Delfina 2 years ago
↳ replying to Sunshine
I think C is the correct command for ingesting the static file.
PA
Paris 2 years ago
I think the correct answer is option C. It clearly states that the log file has not been collected previously, so 'add monitor' would be the appropriate command to ingest the static file.
DO
Dorsey 2 years ago
↳ replying to Paris
Brandee: So, we all agree that option C is the correct choice.
RO
Rosendo 2 years ago
↳ replying to Paris
Yes, option C specifies ingesting a file that has not been collected previously.
BR
Brandee 2 years ago
↳ replying to Paris
I agree, 'add monitor' would be the right command to use.
AL
Alonso 2 years ago
↳ replying to Paris
I think the correct answer is option C.
CH
Charlene 2 years ago
I think the answer is C.
0/2000 characters

Save Cancel