Most guides point to A for cache attacks between VMs, matches EC-Council's official materials I've seen. Worth re-reading the incident response section and grabbing a few lab scenarios if you want more clarity.
Probably A since Slowloris specifically hits the application layer. If the question had said it’s a network-layer or bandwidth-based DoS, I’d reconsider and maybe lean towards B or C. The official guide and practice tests both highlight Slowloris as classic app-layer stuff.
I don't think C fits here. Anti-forensics (D) is all about deliberately stopping or confusing the response and forensic process, like erasing traces or corrupting logs. The others-scanning, footprinting, enumeration-are just info gathering steps, not designed to mislead investigators. Pretty sure D is right but I get why C might look tempting if you're thinking about indirect effects. Anyone disagree?
Option C makes more sense here. The key part is the malicious URL redirecting to evilsite.org, which fits unvalidated redirects and forwards from OWASP. D (SQL injection) would need details about database queries, but nothing in the scenario suggests that. Easy to mix up if you just see "malicious URL" though! Pretty sure it's C, open to discussion if I'm missing something.
C or D tbh. C is for sniffers but 'hostmap' in D maps hosts, which could theoretically be used to find devices in odd modes if you parse the results creatively. I think C is more direct but D feels tempting if you just skim the question. Anyone else see a reason to pick D?
For me, C since the sniffer-detect script is specifically designed to find NICs in promiscuous mode. But do we know if Edwin has credentials or special network access? If the tool needs elevated privileges on target machines, the answer could shift.
-script=sniffer-detect is designed to spot promiscuous mode, which is what the attacker’s using. D just maps hosts but won’t actually help with sniffer detection. Pretty sure it’s C but open to other takes.