The Windows Event Viewer is a management console component that allows administrators to view logs of significant system, security, and application events. The "Application" log is the designated repository for events logged by software programs. When an application fails to run or crashes, it typically generates an error or warning event that is recorded in this log. For an analyst performing initial discovery or triage, checking the Application log in the Event Viewer is a standard first step to identify what happened and gather preliminary details like faulting module and error codes.

A. syslog: This is a logging protocol and standard primarily used in Linux and UNIX-like operating systems, not the name of a specific tool for Windows.

B. MSConfig: This is a system configuration utility used to manage startup processes, boot options, and services, not for viewing application runtime error logs.

D. Process Monitor: This is an advanced, real-time monitoring tool for deep analysis of file system and registry activity, typically used for root cause analysis after an event has been discovered.

1. Microsoft Documentation: In the official documentation for the Event Viewer

Microsoft states

"Windows Logs include: Application (program) events. Events are classified as error

warning

or information

depending on the severity of the event." This confirms its role in logging application failures.

Source: Microsoft Learn

"Event Viewer"

Last Updated: 09/15/2023. Section: "What events are logged?".

2. NIST Special Publication: The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) identifies application logs as a primary source for security event information. "Application logs can be used to detect and analyze application-level attacks

such as unauthorized access to information

as well as application-specific problems

such as an application crash."

Source: NIST SP 800-92

"Guide to Computer Security Log Management"

September 2006. Section 3.2.1

Page 3-2.

3. University Courseware: Reputable university cybersecurity programs teach the use of native OS tools for initial incident analysis. Course materials frequently cite the Event Viewer as the first tool to use when investigating application issues on Windows.

Source: Johns Hopkins University

Whiting School of Engineering

"EN.605.445 Windows System Administration" course materials. Module on "Monitoring and Troubleshooting

" which details using Event Viewer to diagnose application faults.

A Fraggle attack is a type of denial-of-service (DoS) attack that involves sending a large volume of spoofed User Datagram Protocol (UDP) traffic to an IP broadcast address. The source IP address of these packets is forged to be the victim's IP address. When the router forwards these packets to all hosts on the broadcast network, each host sends a reply to the victim's IP address. This amplification effect floods the victim's system with unsolicited UDP traffic, consuming its network bandwidth and resources, ultimately leading to a denial of service. The key elements matching the question are the use of UDP and targeting a broadcast address.

A. Land attack: This attack involves sending a TCP SYN packet where the source IP address and port are spoofed to be the same as the destination, causing the target to enter a loop.

C. Smurf attack: This is functionally identical to a Fraggle attack but uses ICMP echo request packets (pings) instead of UDP packets. The question specifically mentions UDP traffic.

D. Teardrop attack: This attack exploits vulnerabilities in the IP fragmentation reassembly process by sending overlapping, oversized payloads, which can cause the target operating system to crash.

1. CERT Coordination Center

Carnegie Mellon University. In advisory CA-1998-01

the distinction is made clear: "A variation of this attack

called 'fraggle

' uses UDP echo packets in the same fashion [as a Smurf attack uses ICMP packets]."

Source: CERT® Advisory CA-1998-01 Smurf IP Denial-of-Service Attacks. (January 28

1998). Section: "III. Description".

2. Kurose

J. F.

& Ross

K. W. (2017). Computer Networking: A Top-Down Approach (7th ed.). Pearson. University-level textbooks on computer networking describe these attacks. In discussions on Denial-of-Service

the Smurf attack is defined by its use of ICMP echo requests to a broadcast address

while the Fraggle attack is noted as a variant using UDP packets.

Source: Chapter 8

"Security in Computer Networks

" Section 8.2

"Denial of Service (DoS) Attacks."

3. Forouzan

B. A. (2010). TCP/IP Protocol Suite (4th ed.). McGraw-Hill. This academic text details various network attacks. It describes the Smurf attack as using ICMP and the Fraggle attack as its UDP-based counterpart

both leveraging broadcast addresses for amplification.

Source: Chapter 29

"Security

" Section: "Denial-of-Service Attacks."

The actions taken by the SOC analysts—running antivirus scans, checking HIPS alerts, and analyzing network monitoring tools—are all methods for gathering data to determine if a security incident has occurred. This process of detecting potential incidents, analyzing precursors and indicators, and assessing the scope of the event falls squarely within the Identification phase of the incident response lifecycle. The analysts are trying to identify the nature and extent of the problem based on the reported symptoms, which is the primary goal of this phase.

B. Preparation: This phase involves activities performed before an incident, such as establishing policies, training staff, and deploying security tools, not using them to investigate an active event.

C. Recovery: This phase focuses on restoring systems and services to normal operation after an incident has been contained and eradicated, which has not yet happened.

D. Containment: This phase involves taking active steps to limit the spread and impact of an identified incident, such as isolating affected systems, which is not described in the scenario.

1. NIST Special Publication 800-61 Rev. 2

"Computer Security Incident Handling Guide":

Section 3.2.2

Detection and Analysis (p. 25): This section details the process of analyzing data to determine if an incident has occurred. It states

"The most common sources of precursors and indicators are alerts from security devices and software... Examples of sources include... antivirus software

host-based intrusion detection systems (HIDS)

and network intrusion detection systems (NIDS)." The actions in the question directly align with analyzing these sources.

2. Carnegie Mellon University

Software Engineering Institute

"The CERT Guide to Insider Threats":

Chapter 11

Incident Response (p. 238): The guide outlines the incident response process

describing the "Detection and Analysis" phase as the point where the team "analyzes all available information to determine whether an incident has occurred." The activities of checking logs

alerts

and other monitoring data are central to this phase.

3. SANS Institute

"The Six Steps of Incident Response":

Step 2: Identification: This step is described as the process of confirming a breach and understanding its severity. It involves "gathering more evidence

trying to figure out the scope of the compromise

and identifying the attackers’ goals." The SOC analysts' actions are a direct implementation of this step. (Reference: SANS Security Awareness

"Incident Response" Infographic and associated materials).

The Digital Forensics and Incident Response (DFIR) lifecycle follows a standard industry framework (often referred to as PICERL, derived from SANS and aligned with NIST guidelines). The process begins with Preparation to ensure the organization is ready to respond. Identification follows to detect and validate the potential security incident. Once confirmed, Containment is prioritized to limit the scope and damage. Eradication removes the threat and root cause from the environment. Recovery restores systems to normal operation and confirms they are clean. Finally, Lessons Learned (or Post-Incident Activity) involves reviewing the incident to improve future response capabilities.

NIST Special Publication 800-61 Revision 2, Computer Security Incident Handling Guide, August 2012.

Section 3.1 (Introduction): Figure 3-1 "Incident Response Life Cycle" illustrates the cyclic nature but distinct phases: Preparation -> Detection & Analysis (Identification) -> Containment, Eradication, & Recovery -> Post-Incident Activity.

Section 3.2: Details "Preparation".

Section 3.3: Details "Detection and Analysis".

Section 3.4: Details "Containment, Eradication, and Recovery".

Section 3.5: Details "Post-Incident Activity" (Lessons Learned).

SANS Institute, Incident Handler's Handbook, 2011.

Chapter 1 (The Incident Response Process): Defines the six-step process explicitly as Preparation, Identification, Containment, Eradication, Recovery, and Lessons Learned.

Simple Network Management Protocol (SNMP) is used for managing and monitoring network devices. Exposing SNMP to the internet is a significant security vulnerability, as it can reveal sensitive information about a network's infrastructure, device configurations, and operational status. Attackers can leverage this information for detailed reconnaissance. Security best practices strongly recommend that access to management protocols like SNMP be restricted to trusted, internal management networks and that all SNMP traffic from the public internet be blocked at the perimeter firewall.

B. SMTP: Simple Mail Transfer Protocol is essential for sending and receiving email between servers. Blocking it would prevent an organization from receiving emails from the internet.

C. NTP: Network Time Protocol is used to synchronize system clocks. Accurate time is critical for logging, forensics, and cryptographic functions. Organizations often need to sync with external time sources.

D. POP3: Post Office Protocol version 3 is used by email clients to retrieve mail. While less common now, blocking it would prevent users who rely on it from accessing their email.

1. Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA). (2017). Securing Network Infrastructure Devices. CISA. In the section "Restrict and Secure Management Interfaces

" the guide explicitly states

"Block access to the management interface from the internet. Protocols such as HTTP

HTTPS

SNMP

SSH

and Telnet should not be accessible from the internet." This directly supports blocking SNMP at the firewall.

2. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). (2008). NIST Special Publication 800-123: Guide to General Server Security. Section 5.6

"Secure Remote Administration

" page 5-11. The document advises that "all remote administration should be performed over a secure channel" and recommends restricting access to management networks

which implicitly supports blocking general internet access to management protocols like SNMP.

3. University of California

Berkeley. Security Best Practices: Network. Berkeley Information Security Office. The guidelines recommend to "Block all unneeded ports at the firewall" and specifically list SNMP (ports 161/162) as a protocol that is "commonly scanned for" and should be firewalled from the Internet unless there is a specific business need.

Piecewise hashing involves breaking a file into smaller, fixed-size blocks and hashing each block individually. This technique is useful for finding similarities between files, even when parts have been altered. The hashdeep tool is specifically designed for advanced forensic hashing and includes a function for block-based piecewise hashing, which is activated using the -p command-line flag. This allows an analyst to generate and compare hashes for individual segments of a disk image or file, which is not possible with standard hashing utilities.

A. md5sum is a standard utility that computes a single MD5 hash for an entire file. It does not support breaking the file into segments for hashing.

B. sha256sum functions similarly to md5sum but uses the SHA-256 algorithm. It performs whole-file hashing only and lacks any piecewise hashing capability.

C. md5deep is a related tool from the same suite as hashdeep, but hashdeep is the modern, more versatile program that officially incorporates piecewise hashing alongside multiple algorithm support.

1. Hashdeep Official Documentation (Man Page): The manual page for the hashdeep tool explicitly documents the piecewise hashing feature.

Reference: hashdeep(1) man page.

Quote: "-p - Piecewise hashing. Break the file into blocks of size. The output format is modified to include the block size." (This can be found in the standard Linux man pages for the hashdeep package or on its official project page).

2. University Courseware: Reputable computer science and cybersecurity programs cover advanced forensic tools

including the hashdeep suite.

Reference: Rochester Institute of Technology

CSEC-464: Computer Forensics

"Hashing" lecture notes.

Content: Course materials discuss the limitations of traditional hashing (MD5

SHA-1) for finding similar files and introduce advanced tools like the hashdeep suite

noting its capability for recursive and piecewise hashing in forensic investigations.

3. Academic Publication on Hashing Concepts: The concept of piecewise hashing is foundational in modern digital forensics for similarity analysis.

Reference: Roussev

V. (2011). "An evaluation of forensic similarity hashes." Digital Investigation

8

S34-S41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.diin.2011.05.005

Content: This paper discusses various hashing methods used in digital forensics

including block-based hashing (as implemented by hashdeep) and context-triggered piecewise hashing

establishing the academic and practical basis for using such tools in investigations.

This strategy involves one full backup per week and daily backups of only the data that has changed since the last backup of any kind. This makes the daily (weekday) backup process extremely fast and minimizes storage consumption, as each incremental file only contains a single day's changes. However, for a full restoration, one must apply the last full backup and then every single subsequent incremental backup in the correct order. This multi-step process is significantly more complex and time-consuming than restoring from differential or full backups, thereby resulting in the longest restore time.

A. Full weekly backup with daily differential backups.

A differential backup saves all changes since the last full backup, causing backup time and storage to grow each day. Restoration is faster, requiring only the full and the latest differential backup.

B. Mirror backups on a daily basis.

A mirror is a direct copy of the source data. The backup time is long (similar to a full backup), and the restore process is very fast, which contradicts the question's requirements.

C. Full backups on a daily basis.

This method has the longest daily backup time, consumes the most storage space, and offers the fastest possible restore time, directly opposing all three conditions specified in the question.

1. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Special Publication 800-34 Rev. 1

Contingency Planning Guide for Federal Information Systems.

Section 3.4.2

Data Backup Strategies

Page 28: This document describes an incremental backup as copying "all files that have been changed since the last full or incremental backup." It explicitly states

"This method uses the least amount of media and is the fastest method for backing up." It also details the complex restoration process: "restoration requires the last full backup and all incremental backups since the last full backup." This confirms the long restore time.

2. University of Washington

IT Connect

Types of Backup.

Section: Incremental Backup: This university resource clearly outlines the trade-offs. Under "Pros

" it lists "Fastest backup" and "Uses least storage space." Under "Cons

" it states "Slowest restore" because "the last full backup and all subsequent incremental backups are needed." This directly supports all three elements of the question.

3. Limoncelli

T. A.

Hogan

C. J.

& Chalup

S. R. (2017). The Practice of System and Network Administration

Volume 1: DevOps and other Best Practices for Enterprise IT (3rd ed.). Addison-Wesley Professional.

Chapter 22.4.2

Backup Types

Pages 538-539: This standard academic and professional text explains that incremental backups are the fastest to perform. It contrasts this with the restoration process

stating

"To restore a filesystem

one must restore the last full dump and then every incremental dump since then

in order." This highlights the lengthy and complex nature of the restore.

Risk is fundamentally the potential for loss or damage to an asset. The widely accepted conceptual model for risk requires three components: a threat (the potential for harm), a vulnerability (a weakness that can be exploited), and an asset (the item of value being protected). A threat agent exploits a vulnerability to cause an adverse impact on an asset. Without an asset, the combination of a threat and a vulnerability is meaningless as there is no potential for loss or negative consequence. Therefore, 'Asset' is the essential missing factor in this conceptual formula.

A. Exploits: An exploit is the specific method or code used by a threat to take advantage of a vulnerability, not a fundamental component of the risk formula itself.

B. Security: Security consists of the controls and countermeasures implemented to reduce or mitigate risk; it is the solution, not a component of the problem's calculation.

D. Probability: While probability (or likelihood) is a key element in quantitative risk analysis (e.g., Risk = Probability x Impact), 'Asset' is the more fundamental component representing the impact side of the equation in this conceptual model.

1. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). (2012). Guide for Conducting Risk Assessments (NIST Special Publication 800-30

Revision 1). Section 2.1

Page 5. This document establishes the foundational concepts of risk

stating that risk is "a function of the likelihood of a given threat-source’s exercising a particular potential vulnerability

and the resulting impact of that adverse event on the organization." The impact is inherently tied to the organization's assets.

2. Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) OpenCourseWare. (2014). 6.858 Computer Systems Security

Fall 2014. Lecture 1: Introduction and Threat Models. Slide 20. The lecture slides present the risk formula as "Risk = Threat x Vulnerability x Cost

" where "Cost" represents the value of the asset being impacted.

3. Stoneburner

G.

Goguen

A.

& Feringa

A. (2002). Risk Management Guide for Information Technology Systems (NIST Special Publication 800-30). Section 2.2

"Risk Assessment

" Figure 2-1. This earlier version explicitly shows the relationship where a Threat-source

if motivated

may exploit a vulnerability

causing an impact on an asset

which constitutes a risk.

The vulnerability assessment process follows a structured lifecycle. After an automated tool performs a scan and identifies potential vulnerabilities (exposures), the immediate next step is to analyze and assess these findings. This critical phase involves validating the results to eliminate false positives, evaluating the contextual risk of each vulnerability to the specific organization, and prioritizing them based on severity and business impact. This assessment transforms raw scan data into actionable intelligence, which is essential before any reporting or remediation activities can effectively take place.

A. Hardening the infrastructure: This is part of the remediation phase, which occurs much later in the process, after vulnerabilities have been assessed, reported, and prioritized for fixing.

B. Documenting exceptions: This is a risk management activity that happens after a vulnerability has been assessed. An organization may decide to accept the risk and document an exception, but this is not the immediate next step for all findings.

D. Generating reports: While a scanner generates an output file, the formal reporting step in a vulnerability assessment process involves communicating the analyzed and validated findings to stakeholders. Therefore, assessment must precede the creation of a meaningful report.

1. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Special Publication 800-115

"Technical Guide to Information Security Testing and Assessment." This guide outlines the security assessment methodology. The post-execution phase consists of Analysis and then Reporting. Section 5.2

"Analysis

" states

"The analysis phase examines the data gathered during the execution phase [e.g.

vulnerability scan]... to identify vulnerabilities." Section 5.3

"Reporting

" follows

stating

"The reporting phase documents the results of the assessment." This clearly places analysis/assessment after the scan and before reporting.

2. Kim

D.

& Solomon

M. G. (2016). Fundamentals of information systems security (3rd ed.). Jones & Bartlett Learning. Chapter 10

"Vulnerability Assessment and Penetration Testing

" describes the vulnerability assessment process. The steps are outlined as: 1. Asset Identification

2. Vulnerability Scanning

3. Vulnerability Analysis and Prioritization

4. Reporting

5. Remediation. This academic source confirms that analysis is the direct next step after scanning.

3. OWASP. (2014). OWASP Testing Guide v4. Section 4.1

"Introduction and Objectives

" details the testing framework phases. After information gathering and discovery (which includes scanning)

the next phase is "Exploitation/Analysis

" where findings are validated and their impact is assessed before the final "Reporting" phase. This industry-standard guide for web application security follows the same logical progression.

A rainbow table is a pre-computed lookup table used for reversing cryptographic hash functions, primarily for cracking password hashes. The attacker generates hashes for a large number of potential passwords and stores them in a specialized table. When an attacker intercepts a hash, they look it up in this table to find the corresponding plaintext password. This method perfectly matches the scenario of comparing an intercepted hash to "pre-computed hashes." It represents a time-memory trade-off, where significant pre-computation time and storage are exchanged for faster cracking.

A. Password sniffing: This is a method of intercepting data, such as passwords or hashes, from network traffic, not the technique used to crack the hash itself.

B. Brute force attack: This method computes hashes for every possible password combination in real-time during the attack, rather than using a pre-computed table.

D. Dictionary attack: This method computes hashes for a specific list of common words or passwords during the attack, not by looking them up in a pre-computed table.

1. Oechslin

P. (2003). Making a Faster Cryptanalytic Time-Memory Trade-Off. In D. Boneh (Ed.)

Advances in Cryptology - CRYPTO 2003 (Vol. 2729

pp. 617-630). Springer. Section 1

"Introduction

" describes the principle of pre-calculating hash chains to create a time-memory trade-off for reversing hash functions. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-45146-436

2. Perrig

A.

& Song

D. (2014). CS 161: Computer Security

Lecture 8: Authentication. University of California

Berkeley. The lecture slides differentiate password cracking methods

explicitly defining rainbow tables as: "Precompute a giant table of hash(password) -> password."

3. Boneh

D. (2022). CS 255: Introduction to Cryptography

Lecture 10: Hash functions. Stanford University. The course notes discuss password hashing and attacks

describing pre-computation attacks (rainbow tables) as a method where an adversary pre-computes a large table of (m

H(m)) pairs.