Q: 2
Which method in the WildFire analysis report detonates unknown submissions to provide visibility
into real-world effects and behavior?
Options
Discussion
Its A, static is a trap here since "detonate" means actually executing, not just code review.
B is a common trap, this one's A since "detonates" means actual execution not code review.
A. since "detonates" means WildFire actually runs the file to watch what it does in a sandbox. Static (B) just looks at code without execution. Pretty sure dynamic is what gives that real-world behavior visibility, but open to feedback if someone has seen different.
B . Static analysis sounds right because it still gives visibility into behaviors through code inspection, even if not actually running the file. Maybe I'm missing something, but I don't see why dynamic would be needed just for the report.
Option D is a trap here, since machine learning helps classify but doesn't "detonate" files. It's A, dynamic analysis, that actually runs the unknown file in the sandbox to watch its real behavior. Detonate always means execution, not just static analysis. Pretty sure on this, but open if someone sees a wrinkle.
Had something like this in a mock, A is what WildFire uses to actually run files and check real-world behavior.
B
Detonates definitely points to A here, since static analysis (B) only inspects code without running anything.
Yeah, detonating unknown files means they're actually run in a sandbox to see their true behavior, so I'd say A makes sense. Static analysis (B) just inspects the code without executing, which isn't what "detonate" suggests here. Anyone see it another way?
That "detonates" keyword really points to A. Dynamic analysis actually runs the file in a virtual sandbox to see what happens, while static just checks code. Not 100 percent but pretty sure this is what Palo is looking for here.
Be respectful. No spam.