Pass the ECCouncil ECIH 212-89 Questions and answers with Dumpstech

During the incident handling and response (IH&R) process, the stage of "Evidence gathering and forensics analysis" involves the collection of evidence, forensic analysis, and detailed investigation to uncover the root cause of the incident. This stage is crucial for understanding how the incident occurred, identifying the threat actors involved, the methods they used (threat vectors), and the extent of the impact. By analyzing evidence, incident responders can reconstruct the sequence of events, identify the vulnerabilities exploited, and determine the scope of the incident. This information is vital for resolving the incident effectively and taking steps to prevent future occurrences.

The statement "Do not download or execute applications from trusted sources" is incorrect and not considered a good practice for maintaining information security and eradicating malware incidents. In contrast, downloading or executing applications from trusted sources is a fundamental security best practice. Trusted sources are vetted and are generally considered safe for downloading software, updates, and applications. This practice helps to minimize the risk of introducing malware into the organizational environment. The other options (A, B, C) represent good practices that help in reducing the likelihood of malware infections by avoiding potentially harmful actions.

While technical solutions like antivirus updates, disabling HTML in emails, and web proxy filtering play significant roles in securing email systems, the best method to prevent email incidents is often considered to be end-user training. This is because many email threats, such as phishing, rely on exploiting user behavior rather than technical vulnerabilities. By educating users on the risks associated with suspicious emails, how to recognize potentially harmful messages, and the importance of not clicking on unknown links or attachments, organizations can significantly reduce the risk of email-related incidents. End-user training empowers individuals to act as a critical line of defense against email-based threats, complementing technical safeguards.

Public Key Infrastructure (PKI) is a framework used to manage digital certificates and public-key encryption. It enables secure electronic transfer of information for a range of network activities such as e-commerce, internet banking, and confidential email. PKI is fundamental to the management of encryption keys and digital certificates, ensuring the secure exchange of data over networks and verification of identity.

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation (ECIH-aligned):

In the ECIH Incident Handling lifecycle, once a breach is detected, the IH&R team must focus on analysis and scoping to understand how the attack occurred, what systems were affected, and whether the attacker still has access.

Option D is correct because analyzing logs with Incident Response Automation and Orchestration (IRAO) tools allows rapid correlation of events, identification of attacker entry points, and determination of breach scope. ECIH stresses that zero-day incidents require deep forensic and timeline analysis to ensure complete containment and prevent recurrence.

Options A and C are important but depend on accurate breach understanding. Option B is premature without full incident context.

Therefore, log analysis and origin tracing is the correct primary focus.

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation (ECIH-aligned):

This question is based on the shared responsibility model, a fundamental concept in ECIH cloud incident handling. While customers manage applications, configurations, and data, the cloud service provider (CSP) controls the underlying infrastructure, including orchestration engines, schedulers, and runtime environments.

System-level telemetry such as hypervisor activity and orchestration logs cannot be accessed by customers. Only the CSP can provide this visibility. Therefore, Option C is correct.

The other options manage higher-level responsibilities but lack authority over infrastructure-layer components.

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation (ECIH-aligned):

This scenario involves a high-privilege insider threat, one of the most difficult risks to detect. ECIH emphasizes that senior executives often have broad access, making role-based restrictions impractical.

Option A is correct because advanced employee monitoring and behavioral analytics can detect abnormal access patterns, data exfiltration trends, and deviations from established baselines—even for executives. These tools operate within legal and policy frameworks while providing actionable alerts.

Options B and C reduce efficiency and are easily bypassed. Option D is intrusive and ineffective for digital exfiltration.

ECIH identifies behavioral monitoring as the most effective control for detecting malicious insiders with legitimate access, making Option A correct.

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation (ECIH-aligned):

The ECIH Risk Assessment and Recovery module stresses that recovery must not reintroduce threats. When backups may be compromised, validating their integrity is critical.

Option A is correct because scanning backups with updated signatures and heuristic analysis ensures that latent malware is detected before restoration. ECIH emphasizes that restoring infected backups can trigger reinfection and negate eradication efforts.

Option D is excessive and disruptive. Option B is a containment control, not a recovery safeguard. Option C risks reintroducing compromised data.

Therefore, validating backups before restoration is the priority recovery action.

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation (ECIH-aligned):

This scenario describes a SYN flood attack, a classic protocol-level Denial-of-Service technique covered in the ECIH Network Security Incidents module. In a SYN flood, attackers send a large volume of TCP SYN packets but never complete the three-way handshake, leaving the server waiting for responses and exhausting connection resources.

Option D is correct because incomplete TCP handshakes, half-open connections, and resource exhaustion are defining characteristics of SYN flood attacks. The presence of multiple source IPs further suggests a distributed attack.

Option A involves taking over an existing session, not exhausting resources. Option B applies to UDP-based amplification attacks. Option C affects DNS resolution, not TCP handshakes.

ECIH stresses that early identification of SYN floods allows defenders to deploy SYN cookies, rate limiting, and upstream filtering. Recognizing handshake anomalies is therefore critical in protecting service availability.

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation (ECIH-aligned):

ECIH email incident response guidance emphasizes email header analysis as the primary validation technique for suspected spoofing or impersonation attacks.

Option A is correct because headers reveal sender IPs, routing paths, and authentication results (SPF, DKIM, DMARC). This evidence directly confirms whether the email originated from a legitimate source.

Options B, C, and D are supplementary actions but do not provide authoritative validation.