Free ICS2 CSSLP Practice Exams (Certified Secure Software Lifecycle Professional)

A software vendor called Solstice Labs needs to prove the chain of custody authenticity and integrity of application builds as they move between test and production environments. What practical control best ensures the software pedigree during the transfer?

• ❏ A. Conduct regular vulnerability scans on the receiving environment

• ❏ B. Apply cryptographic code signing and digital signatures to the artifacts

• ❏ C. Maintain comprehensive transfer records and audit logs

• ❏ D. Verify the sender’s reputation and historical behavior

During which stage of the secure software development lifecycle does a team map the application attack surface to discover possible entry points for adversaries?

• ❏ A. Threat modeling

• ❏ B. Cloud IAM configuration review

• ❏ C. Attack surface analysis

• ❏ D. Static application security testing

During the acceptance phase independent audits are often performed to confirm which aspects of the delivered solution? (Choose 4)

• ❏ A. Assurance that the delivered solution complies with applicable laws and regulations

• ❏ B. Independent third party attestation

• ❏ C. Assurance that the delivered solution is complete

• ❏ D. Assurance that the delivered solution is correct and meets the agreed specifications

A regional payments startup named Meridian Apps wants a development approach that produces working software frequently and keeps customers engaged throughout the process. Which methodology prioritizes iterative development and ongoing customer collaboration?

• ❏ A. Lean

• ❏ B. Waterfall

• ❏ C. Predictive

• ❏ D. Agile

What assurances does software signing give an end user? (Choose 2)

• ❏ A. Assurance that the package is free from vulnerabilities

• ❏ B. Evidence that the file has not been altered since signing

• ❏ C. Confirmation of the publisher’s identity

• ❏ D. Assurance that the program will execute without errors

At a financial software firm named Meridian Labs the requirements group writes misuse cases early in the development cycle. What goal do these misuse cases primarily serve?

• ❏ A. Identify and document recurring exploit techniques

• ❏ B. Cloud Armor

• ❏ C. Profile potential attacker types and motivations

• ❏ D. Define how the system should respond to improper or malicious use

How would you evaluate a live application to uncover configuration mistakes or data corruption while it is running in production?

• ❏ A. Cloud Monitoring

• ❏ B. Operational simulation testing

• ❏ C. Configuration validation testing

• ❏ D. Security scanning

Many enterprises maintain a mix of system architectures across their environment. What is the main reason this fragmentation tends to occur?

• ❏ A. The adoption of multiple cloud platforms and services increases architectural diversity

• ❏ B. Organizations often retain legacy systems instead of fully retiring them

• ❏ C. Development teams prefer bespoke creative solutions for distinct problems

• ❏ D. Rapid changes in technology create complexity that is difficult to manage

Which security practice focuses on keeping event records and identifying unauthorized modifications to vital configuration files or operating system components?

• ❏ A. Identity and Access Management controls

• ❏ B. Static application security testing

• ❏ C. Logging and auditing of system and file events

• ❏ D. Secure integration of application components

Which pair of categories distinguishes data that is stored in predefined fields from data that lacks a fixed schema?

• ❏ A. Personal data and non-personal data

• ❏ B. Encrypted data and plaintext data

• ❏ C. Structured data and unstructured data

• ❏ D. Data at rest and data in transit

All ISC2 question come from my CSSLP Udemy Course and certificationexams.pro

A security operations team at Meridian Cloud runs daily vulnerability scans and combines the results with threat feeds and asset importance to decide what to fix first. Which method gives the best way to prioritize remediation efforts?

• ❏ A. Rely solely on the Common Vulnerability Scoring System score to order fixes

• ❏ B. Prioritize issues by evaluating context potential impact exploitability and the organization level of risk

• ❏ C. Ignore findings labeled low severity and address only critical defects

• ❏ D. Rank vulnerabilities solely by how easy they are to exploit and how often exploits occur

A regional payments company named Northbridge is evaluating third-party libraries for its transaction platform. When assessing an external software component which attributes should be reviewed to judge the component’s trustworthiness and dependability?

• ❏ A. The total number of security certifications the product holds

• ❏ B. Whether the vendor maintains a public vulnerability disclosure and bug bounty program

• ❏ C. Consolidated assessment score from frameworks such as the Cloud Assurance Matrix

• ❏ D. The provenance of the software and the vendor’s reputation

A cloud security architect at Nimbus Cloud is evaluating threats to virtual machine infrastructure and asks which of the following is not normally classified as a hypervisor vulnerability?

• ❏ A. Denial of Service targeting the hypervisor

• ❏ B. Heap or memory corruption in the hypervisor

• ❏ C. Network segmentation misconfiguration

• ❏ D. Hypervisor lacking security patches

A mid sized fintech named Meridian Ledger is defining its secure development lifecycle and wants consistent build behavior across teams. How should compiler flags be managed within that lifecycle?

• ❏ A. Allow individual developers to select flags per repository

• ❏ B. Managed centrally as a required SDL configuration

• ❏ C. Cloud Build

• ❏ D. Restrict flags to a minimal set of critical checks to speed builds

Which concept is most directly associated with the fail safe defaults security principle?

• ❏ A. Least privilege access model

• ❏ B. Session management and lifecycle control

• ❏ C. Exception handling and error management

• ❏ D. Single point of failure concerns

During a security simulation for a retail payments platform at Stonebridge Commerce why would testers employ a synthetic workload during the exercise?

• ❏ A. To perform cryptographic algorithm verification

• ❏ B. To replicate typical user sessions and transactions

• ❏ C. To create unpredictable input datasets

• ❏ D. To stress the infrastructure at peak capacity

How does making security a foundational part of the software development lifecycle benefit a company?

• ❏ A. It eliminates the need for external security audits

• ❏ B. It increases the complexity of application code

• ❏ C. It improves the organization’s overall security posture

• ❏ D. It shortens development timelines by removing security checkpoints

At which scopes should source code analysis be carried out to provide the most complete coverage?

• ❏ A. During continuous integration pipeline scans

• ❏ B. Across the complete system level

• ❏ C. Across every layer of the software stack

• ❏ D. At the individual component level

A development group at Meridian Systems uses a subject object activity matrix during requirements analysis. What is the intended purpose of that matrix?

• ❏ A. Frame user level requirements that will drive the subsequent design phase

• ❏ B. Convert requirement details straight into detailed design documentation

• ❏ C. Map subjects and objects to access permissions for security configuration

• ❏ D. Document the actions associated with each subject and object pairing

After a software release which vulnerability management action involves making code or configuration changes to eliminate identified security flaws?

• ❏ A. Verification procedures

• ❏ B. Certification assessment

• ❏ C. Deploying patches to remediate vulnerabilities

• ❏ D. Validation testing

Which components must be present to set up a discretionary access control system? (Choose 2)

• ❏ A. Service accounts

• ❏ B. Access rights assigned by resource owners

• ❏ C. Static data classification labels

• ❏ D. Individual user accounts

When a software group performs threat modeling during the design phase what items should they identify and document? (Choose 2)

• ❏ A. How components relate within the architecture

• ❏ B. Identified threats to the application

• ❏ C. The application interfaces with other systems

• ❏ D. Planned mitigation measures that remove or reduce exposures

A security team at Summit Ridge Security uses an industry standard vulnerability scoring framework to guide remediation and resource allocation for discovered weaknesses. What management activities does such a scoring system support? (Choose 2)

• ❏ A. Standardize documentation of the entire software development lifecycle

• ❏ B. Maintain an inventory of code bugs and security vulnerabilities

• ❏ C. Provide a common numeric score to prioritize remediation work

• ❏ D. Estimate the likely impact and severity of a vulnerability

Which statement best describes the role of compiler switches in the software build process?

• ❏ A. Cloud Build

• ❏ B. Compiler switches are used mainly to provide extra runtime debugging output while the program executes

• ❏ C. Compiler switches are command line arguments that modify the compiler’s behavior during compilation

• ❏ D. Compiler switches determine which programming language a project is written in

When a technology team at a midsize firm conducts an operational risk assessment which of the following would not normally be treated as part of that assessment?

• ❏ A. Regulatory and legal compliance

• ❏ B. End to end system integration

• ❏ C. Operator competency and training

• ❏ D. Deployment environment and topology

All ISC2 question come from my CSSLP Udemy Course and certificationexams.pro

When a platform guarantees that a user cannot later deny having performed a specific action on a resource which security property is being enforced?

• ❏ A. Layered defense

• ❏ B. Cloud Audit Logs

• ❏ C. Division of responsibilities

• ❏ D. Nonrepudiation

Software configuration management comprises the activities that record and control which elements of a software build?

• ❏ A. Setup and configuration instructions

• ❏ B. Complete source code listings

• ❏ C. Software components with precise version identifiers

• ❏ D. User acceptance criteria

When creating a security architecture what type of record or artifact should be established as a priority?

• ❏ A. Input validation routines

• ❏ B. Identity and access management policies

• ❏ C. Security and audit logs

• ❏ D. Change control processes

An online payments startup named OakPay is reviewing its software supply chain and wants to validate third party libraries before release. What is the primary purpose of checking the pedigree and provenance of those software components?

• ❏ A. Recording changes across the build and development lifecycle

• ❏ B. Binary Authorization

• ❏ C. Establishing the source and authenticity of software components

• ❏ D. Detecting unauthorized distribution or copyright infringement

Confirming that a patch has not caused previously working functionality to fail by retesting multiple released builds is called what?

• ❏ A. Fuzz testing

• ❏ B. Penetration testing

• ❏ C. Canary testing

• ❏ D. Regression testing

What connections does a Security Requirements Traceability Matrix capture to show where each security requirement originated and what it relates to?

• ❏ A. Security requirements aligned with documented misuse and abuse scenarios

• ❏ B. Security requirements mapped to their originating artifacts such as use cases and user stories

• ❏ C. Functional requirements linked with non functional requirements such as performance or availability

• ❏ D. Security requirements associated with data ownership and stewardship assignments

Which statement most accurately describes access control models?

• ❏ A. Act as general policy frameworks

• ❏ B. Map to authentication and authorization mechanisms

• ❏ C. Identify single points of failure

• ❏ D. Address different facets of protection

Industrial automation platforms like SCADA are typically built for a single purpose and they sometimes become reachable from external networks. What capability must these control systems provide when they are exposed to the Internet?

• ❏ A. Provide an intuitive operator interface that makes field control straightforward

• ❏ B. Use Cloud Pub/Sub

• ❏ C. Maintain physical or logical links to the sensors and actuators they supervise

• ❏ D. Include security mechanisms when they are reachable from public networks

Which hidden interface within a software system often becomes a high risk for attackers and therefore requires careful protection?

• ❏ A. Hardcoded configuration values

• ❏ B. Cryptographic agility

• ❏ C. Undocumented application programming interfaces

• ❏ D. Managed runtime components

When assessing a software deployment what attribute are installation criteria intended to evaluate?

• ❏ A. Performance

• ❏ B. Usability

• ❏ C. Correctness

• ❏ D. Reliability

Maintain comprehensive transfer records and audit logs is the correct choice because it produces an auditable chain of custody for builds as they move between test and production environments.

Maintain comprehensive transfer records and audit logs provides timestamps, actor identifiers, transfer receipts, and checksum or hash verification entries that together document who handled the artifact when and how. These records allow an auditor or investigator to reconstruct the custody path and detect or prove tampering during transfer. Implementing immutable or append only logging, secure storage of receipts, and automated checksum validation during each transfer makes this a practical and verifiable control.

Apply cryptographic code signing and digital signatures to the artifacts is useful for proving origin and for validating that an artifact was not altered, but signing alone does not record the sequence of hands and transfers that constitute chain of custody. Signing complements audit logs but it does not replace transfer records for custody verification.

Conduct regular vulnerability scans on the receiving environment improves the security posture of the target system, but it does not provide evidence of who transferred the build or of the custody chain during movement between environments. Scans do not prove pedigree or transfer history.

Verify the sender’s reputation and historical behavior can help assess trust but it is an imprecise and nonauditable control for chain of custody. Reputation checks do not produce the concrete, time stamped records needed to prove which entity actually handled the artifact during a transfer.

When a question asks about chain of custody choose the control that produces an auditable trail and immutable evidence rather than a control that only verifies integrity or reputation.

The correct option is Attack surface analysis.

Attack surface analysis is the phase in which the team enumerates and maps the application’s exposed interfaces, services, inputs, and integrations to discover possible entry points that adversaries might use. This mapping helps teams identify where to apply controls and how to prioritize defensive work before more detailed threat assessments or testing.

Threat modeling is related because it identifies threats and attack scenarios, but Threat modeling is broader and focuses on how an attacker could exploit weaknesses rather than the initial task of exhaustively mapping exposed entry points. Threat modeling often uses the attack surface map as an input.

Cloud IAM configuration review focuses on identities, roles, and permission configurations in cloud environments to enforce least privilege. That review does not perform the application level mapping of entry points described in the question and so it is not the correct stage.

Static application security testing analyzes source code or compiled binaries to find coding defects and vulnerabilities. SAST is a testing technique and it does not by itself produce the holistic mapping of exposed interfaces and potential entry points that an attack surface analysis does.

When a question mentions “mapping entry points” or “enumerating exposed interfaces” look for the phrase attack surface or attack surface analysis and do not confuse that mapping activity with threat modeling or code testing tools.

The correct options are Assurance that the delivered solution complies with applicable laws and regulations, Independent third party attestation, Assurance that the delivered solution is complete, and Assurance that the delivered solution is correct and meets the agreed specifications.

Assurance that the delivered solution complies with applicable laws and regulations is confirmed because acceptance audits must verify that the system implements required legal and regulatory controls and that evidence such as policies, logs, and procedural records demonstrate compliance.

Independent third party attestation is part of the acceptance phase when an external auditor or assessor provides an objective evaluation and reduces conflicts of interest and it increases stakeholder confidence in the delivered solution.

Assurance that the delivered solution is complete means auditors check that all agreed deliverables, components, and supporting documentation are present and that no required artifacts or integrations are missing.

Assurance that the delivered solution is correct and meets the agreed specifications relates to functional and non functional verification and validation and it ensures that the system behaves as specified and that security and operational requirements are met.

When answering acceptance phase questions focus on scope and look for options that cover legal compliance, independent validation, completeness, and conformance to specifications because audits are intended to verify those areas.

The correct choice is Agile.

Agile is the methodology that emphasizes short, iterative development cycles and frequent delivery of working software while keeping customers engaged for feedback and reprioritization. This approach uses regular reviews and collaboration so the team can adjust requirements and deliver incremental value, which matches Meridian Apps desire for frequent working software and ongoing customer involvement.

Lean is incorrect because it primarily focuses on waste reduction, flow efficiency, and continuous improvement rather than prescribing iterative customer collaboration and frequent releases as its core definition. Lean ideas can support fast learning but the question targets the methodology known for iterative delivery and direct customer involvement.

Waterfall is incorrect because it is a sequential, phase driven model that completes requirements and design before implementation, which makes frequent working releases and continuous customer collaboration difficult to achieve.

Predictive is incorrect because it refers to plan driven project management that sets scope and schedule up front and relies on following that plan. That approach does not prioritize iterative development or ongoing customer collaboration the way Agile does.

Look for keywords like frequently, iterative, and customer collaboration in the question and choose Agile when those terms appear.

The correct answers are Evidence that the file has not been altered since signing and Confirmation of the publisher’s identity.

A digital signature provides integrity protection. The signer computes a cryptographic hash of the file and signs that hash with a private key. When the signature is verified the verifier recomputes the hash and checks the signature against the signer’s certificate so any post signing modification is detectable.

Code signing also provides a way to link a public key to a claimed identity through a certificate that is typically issued or vouched for by a certificate authority. That certificate and the signature let you confirm who signed the file which gives confirmation of the publisher’s identity.

Assurance that the package is free from vulnerabilities is incorrect because signing does not scan or test the code for security flaws. A valid signature only indicates origin and integrity and it cannot guarantee that the software contains no vulnerabilities.

Assurance that the program will execute without errors is incorrect because a signature does not attest to functional correctness or runtime behavior. Execution success depends on code quality, environment, and dependencies and not on the presence of a signature.

When you see questions about code signing remember it guarantees integrity and publisher identity but it does not guarantee the absence of bugs or that the program will run correctly.

The correct option is Define how the system should respond to improper or malicious use.

Misuse cases are negative use cases that describe how an actor might attempt to use the system improperly or maliciously and they specify the desired system behavior in those scenarios. Writing them early lets designers and developers turn those scenarios into concrete requirements such as input validation, error handling, logging, alerts, and safe failure modes that the system must implement.

Misuse cases translate threats into functional responses and acceptance criteria so that testing and implementation can verify the system handles misuse in a secure and predictable way.

Identify and document recurring exploit techniques is incorrect because misuse cases focus on scenarios and the required system responses rather than producing a catalog of exploit techniques. That cataloging is a separate activity in threat intelligence and vulnerability research.

Cloud Armor is incorrect because it is a product name and not a description of the purpose of misuse cases. The question asks about the goal of writing misuse cases and not about a specific security product.

Profile potential attacker types and motivations is incorrect because profiling attackers is part of broader threat modeling and persona work. Misuse cases can be informed by attacker profiles but their primary goal is to define how the system should respond to improper or malicious actions.

When you see misuse or abuse cases think about the system’s response and required controls rather than attacker profiles or specific exploits. Focus on the action and the required handling.

The correct answer is Operational simulation testing.

Operational simulation testing involves exercising a live production system with realistic traffic patterns or injected faults so that you can observe behavior under true operational conditions. This type of testing can replay real workloads, run synthetic transactions, or perform controlled fault injection to surface configuration mistakes and data corruption that only appear when the full software and data paths are exercised in production.

Cloud Monitoring is not the best choice because it focuses on collecting metrics, logs, and alerts and it does not actively simulate real user traffic or inject faults to reveal hidden configuration errors or corrupted data. Monitoring helps detect symptoms but it does not by itself reproduce the conditions that uncover root causes.

Configuration validation testing is typically performed prior to deployment and it validates declared settings and templates rather than exercising a running system with realistic load and fault scenarios. That testing can catch misconfigurations earlier but it will not always reveal issues that only show up under production runtime conditions.

Security scanning is aimed at finding vulnerabilities and insecure configurations from a security standpoint and it does not generally look for runtime data corruption or the subtle operational misconfigurations that only surface when the application is exercised in production. Security scans are complementary but they do not replace operational simulation.

When you see an exam choice that mentions simulating real traffic, controlled faults, or replaying production workloads pick it for discovering runtime configuration mistakes and data corruption because these issues often only appear when the system is actually exercised in production. Consider keywords like simulate and operational.

Organizations often retain legacy systems instead of fully retiring them is correct.

Organizations often retain legacy systems instead of fully retiring them creates fragmentation because older systems are costly and risky to replace and because they often have deep integrations and custom data flows that prevent simple consolidation. Migration projects compete for budget and staff and they require extensive testing so many organizations choose to keep legacy systems running while layering newer architectures on top.

Legacy systems also remain because of regulatory requirements and vendor lock in and because business units rely on specific functionality that is not available or fully tested in modern replacements. That combination of technical debt and organizational inertia leads to a heterogeneous environment more often than the other reasons listed.

The adoption of multiple cloud platforms and services increases architectural diversity is incorrect because using multiple clouds is a modern, often intentional strategy that produces diversity by design and it does not explain the persistent presence of old, hard to retire systems. Cloud diversity can be managed with governance and automation whereas legacy retention creates long lived fragmentation.

Development teams prefer bespoke creative solutions for distinct problems is incorrect because bespoke solutions may add variation but they are usually created for specific needs and can be consolidated over time. The widespread fragmentation in enterprises is more commonly driven by systems that were never retired than by developers choosing custom approaches.

Rapid changes in technology create complexity that is difficult to manage is incorrect because technological change can increase complexity but it does not by itself explain why old systems remain in production. The key factor is the decision or inability to decommission older systems which keeps multiple architectures in place.

When answering, look for options that describe organizational constraints such as cost, risk, and inertia rather than options that describe intentional architectural choices or general technological change.

Logging and auditing of system and file events is correct. This practice is specifically about keeping detailed event records and identifying unauthorized modifications to important configuration files and operating system components.

Logging captures events such as file accesses, modifications, user logons and system changes. Auditing and log analysis look for anomalies and can include file integrity monitoring to detect tampering. Together these controls provide forensic trails and real time alerts that help identify and investigate unauthorized changes to vital files and OS components.

Identity and Access Management controls manage who can access systems and what permissions they have. They do not by themselves create the persistent event records or perform continuous file integrity checks that are needed to detect unauthorized modifications.

Static application security testing analyzes application source code or binaries for vulnerabilities during development. It does not monitor runtime system or file events or detect changes to operating system components.

Secure integration of application components focuses on designing and deploying components so they communicate securely and do not introduce vulnerabilities. It does not center on logging events or auditing file and system level modifications.

When a question mentions keeping event records or detecting file tampering choose answers that reference logging, auditing or file integrity monitoring as the primary mechanism.

The correct answer is Structured data and unstructured data. This pair specifically contrasts data kept in predefined fields with data that does not follow a fixed schema.

Structured data is organized according to a defined schema such as tables with rows and columns, which makes it straightforward to query with standard languages and tools. Typical examples include relational databases, spreadsheets, and CSV files that enforce column definitions.

Unstructured data lacks a fixed schema and consists of free form content such as documents, email, images, audio, and video. It requires indexing, extraction, or specialized processing to locate or derive meaningful fields and attributes.

Personal data and non-personal data classifies information by whether it identifies an individual and is about privacy rather than about whether the data follows a schema. That distinction does not tell you if the data is stored in predefined fields.

Encrypted data and plaintext data describe the protection or encoding of data and relate to confidentiality. Encryption does not imply a particular structure, so this pair does not answer the schema question.

Data at rest and data in transit describe the location or movement state of data rather than its internal format. These terms indicate where data resides or how it is being transferred and not whether it uses predefined fields.

When a question mentions fields, columns, or schema think about structured versus unstructured data. If the question is about privacy, encryption, or location then those are different classification axes.

The correct answer is Prioritize issues by evaluating context potential impact exploitability and the organization level of risk.

This approach implements risk based vulnerability management and combines scan results with asset importance and threat feeds to focus remediation where it reduces real world risk the most. It considers both impact and exploitability and also factors in organizational context so teams can address high risk items first even when their base severity score is not the highest.

Rely solely on the Common Vulnerability Scoring System score to order fixes is incorrect because the CVSS base score gives a useful baseline but it does not include environmental context or current exploit activity. Relying only on the base score can cause teams to deprioritize vulnerabilities that pose greater risk to critical assets.

Ignore findings labeled low severity and address only critical defects is incorrect because low severity findings can become serious when they affect important systems or are chained with other vulnerabilities. Skipping all low severity items can leave attack paths open that lead to major incidents.

Rank vulnerabilities solely by how easy they are to exploit and how often exploits occur is incorrect because exploitability and frequency are only part of the risk equation. A widely exploitable issue with low impact can be less urgent than a harder to exploit vulnerability that threatens a highly valuable asset.

On these questions choose the option that mentions context, asset impact, and threat intelligence rather than an answer that relies on a single metric.

The correct option is Consolidated assessment score from frameworks such as the Cloud Assurance Matrix.

A consolidated assessment score from recognized frameworks provides a standardized and evidence based measure of how well an external component implements security and operational controls. Such scores aggregate control coverage, audit results, and maturity indicators which makes it possible to compare components on trustworthiness and dependability rather than relying on single data points.

Frameworks like the Cloud Assurance Matrix map controls to specific practices and offer assessment methodologies that can be independently validated. That mapping and validation help procurement and risk teams understand gaps, residual risk, and whether the component meets required assurance levels for a payments platform.

The total number of security certifications the product holds is not sufficient because a simple count does not show which controls are covered or how recent and relevant the certifications are. Certifications vary in scope and rigor so the number alone can be misleading.

Whether the vendor maintains a public vulnerability disclosure and bug bounty program is a useful indicator of responsiveness to issues and a proactive security posture. It is however only one facet of security and does not provide a comprehensive, comparable measure of overall trustworthiness or operational dependability.

The provenance of the software and the vendor’s reputation can provide helpful context and qualitative signals but reputation is subjective and provenance information may be incomplete. These factors are best used alongside standardized assessment scores rather than as a standalone basis for trust.

When choosing between options prefer answers that mention standardized assessments or framework mappings because they indicate measurable and repeatable evaluation methods.

The correct answer is Network segmentation misconfiguration.

Network segmentation misconfiguration is a networking and configuration issue that affects how virtual machines communicate and how traffic is isolated. It is not inherently a flaw in the hypervisor implementation even though it can increase the attack surface and enable lateral movement if not addressed.

Vulnerabilities that are normally classified as hypervisor vulnerabilities are flaws in the hypervisor code or its operation that allow guest escape, privilege escalation, or crashes. Network segmentation mistakes belong to network design and access control rather than the hypervisor code base.

Denial of Service targeting the hypervisor is incorrect because resource exhaustion or vulnerabilities that allow an attacker to crash or stall the hypervisor are considered hypervisor vulnerabilities and can impact all hosted VMs.

Heap or memory corruption in the hypervisor is incorrect because memory corruption is a classic class of hypervisor vulnerability and can lead to remote code execution or VM escape from a guest to the host.

Hypervisor lacking security patches is incorrect because an unpatched hypervisor contains known vulnerabilities that attackers can exploit and keeping the hypervisor patched is a fundamental security requirement.

When answering, distinguish between weaknesses in the hypervisor implementation and problems in the surrounding configuration. Look for wording that implies a software flaw or missing patch to identify true hypervisor vulnerabilities and look for network or design language to spot configuration issues. Emphasize code flaws and missing patches as indicators of hypervisor vulnerabilities.

Managed centrally as a required SDL configuration is correct.

Central management ensures that the same compiler hardening flags and warnings are applied across all teams and build pipelines so behavior is consistent and reproducible. Making the flags a required part of the secure development lifecycle also makes them enforceable in CI and subject to audit and change control which supports long term maintenance and security posture.

In practice you implement the central configuration in your build system templates or platform policies and you enforce it in CI pipelines so developers cannot bypass required flags. This approach reduces lead to fewer environment specific issues and makes it easier to update or strengthen flags across the organization when new vulnerabilities or compiler options appear.

Allow individual developers to select flags per repository is wrong because it creates inconsistent build behavior and increases the chance that some repositories will lack important hardening options. Inconsistent flags make vulnerabilities harder to track and remediation more difficult.

Cloud Build is wrong because it is the name of a build service and not an answer about how compiler flags should be governed. Using a particular build tool does not by itself establish a required SDL configuration unless you explicitly apply centralized policies in that tool.

Restrict flags to a minimal set of critical checks to speed builds is wrong because trimming checks for speed reduces security and undermines the goal of consistent, secure builds. Performance can be optimized in other ways but critical hardening flags should remain enforced.

When a question emphasizes consistent behavior across teams prefer answers that describe centralized policies and enforceable configurations rather than per‑developer choices or a single tooling name.

Exception handling and error management is the correct answer. This concept is most directly associated with the fail safe defaults principle because it ensures that when errors occur the system defaults to a safe state rather than granting access or revealing sensitive information.

Fail safe defaults means deny by default and do not assume correct behavior when an unexpected condition arises. Proper exception handling implements this by catching failures, avoiding permissive fallback behavior, and returning minimal or safe responses on error.

Least privilege access model is not the best fit because it focuses on granting users and processes only the permissions they need. That principle reduces exposure but it does not directly dictate how a system should behave when an error occurs.

Session management and lifecycle control deals with token handling, session expiration, and related lifecycle matters. Those concerns are about maintaining session integrity and are not primarily about failing to a safe default on exceptions.

Single point of failure concerns are about availability and architectural redundancy. They address reliability rather than the security behavior a system should adopt when an error or exception happens.

When a question mentions default behavior on errors think fail safe defaults and choose the option related to error or exception handling rather than broader topics like privileges or availability.

The correct answer is To replicate typical user sessions and transactions.

Using a synthetic workload in a security simulation lets testers emulate realistic customer behavior across the retail payments flows. This approach exercises end to end components such as authentication, authorization, clearing and settlement and third party integrations while keeping the inputs controlled and repeatable so that security telemetry and detection rules can be evaluated.

Running To replicate typical user sessions and transactions is particularly valuable for finding business logic flaws, session management issues, and transaction handling gaps that only appear during real world request sequences rather than single isolated checks.

The option To perform cryptographic algorithm verification is incorrect because cryptographic verification requires targeted algorithm tests and validation tools. Those checks are performed at the library or component level and do not depend on emulating user session workflows.

The option To create unpredictable input datasets is incorrect because generating unpredictable or malformed inputs is the domain of fuzzing and random testing. Synthetic workloads are typically controlled and repeatable so that results and alerts can be measured reliably.

The option To stress the infrastructure at peak capacity is incorrect because stress and load testing intentionally push systems to resource limits to measure performance and resilience. Although synthetic workloads can be scaled for load tests their primary use in this context is to mirror normal user transactions for security validation rather than to drive the system to failure.

When a scenario focuses on emulation and detection choose answers that mention replicating user sessions or transaction flows and leave answers like stress testing or cryptographic verification for performance or crypto specific questions.

It improves the organization’s overall security posture is correct.

Making security a foundational part of the software development lifecycle means teams identify and remediate vulnerabilities earlier which reduces risk and lowers the cost of fixes over time. This approach promotes practices such as threat modeling, secure coding, automated security testing, and continuous monitoring which together raise the organization’s resilience against attacks.

It eliminates the need for external security audits is incorrect. Integrating security reduces issues but it does not remove the value of independent audits for compliance, third party validation, and assurance.

It increases the complexity of application code is incorrect. Secure design may introduce some controls, but the aim is to reduce the attack surface and prevent insecure ad hoc fixes rather than to add unnecessary complexity.

It shortens development timelines by removing security checkpoints is incorrect. Integrating security adds early checkpoints, but it typically shortens overall delivery time by avoiding costly rework and late security remediation.

On the exam favor answers that describe integrating security early because earlier detection and built in controls usually reduce cost and risk. Pick choices about improving security posture or earlier detection.

The correct option is Across every layer of the software stack.

Performing source code analysis across every layer of the software stack ensures that you inspect application code, third party libraries, frameworks, middleware, and platform integration points. This broad scope reduces blind spots because vulnerabilities can originate in one layer and manifest through another, and the combined approach gives both breadth and depth of coverage.

During continuous integration pipeline scans is incomplete because CI scans are a valuable part of automated testing but they often focus on build artifacts and may not include exhaustive analysis of all layers or long lived dependencies.

Across the complete system level sounds broad but it can be too coarse because system level checks may miss layer specific code issues and library level weaknesses that only source analysis will reveal.

At the individual component level is useful for focused checks but it is too narrow on its own because it can miss interactions between components and vulnerabilities that arise at higher or lower layers of the stack.

Choose the option that implies the most comprehensive coverage. If an answer says every layer or similar wording it is usually the best choice for complete source analysis.

Document the actions associated with each subject and object pairing is correct.

A subject object activity matrix is used in requirements analysis to record which subjects perform which actions on which objects. The matrix enumerates actors and resources and lists the expected activities between them so that functional requirements are clear and testable. This artifact helps trace requirements to use cases and test cases and ensures that no important interactions are missed.

Frame user level requirements that will drive the subsequent design phase is not correct because that option describes a high level outcome of requirements work but not the specific purpose of the matrix. The matrix documents concrete actor to resource actions rather than framing broad user level requirements.

Convert requirement details straight into detailed design documentation is not correct because the matrix is an analysis and modeling tool. Designers may use it as input but the matrix itself does not produce detailed design specifications or implementation details.

Map subjects and objects to access permissions for security configuration is not correct because that describes an access control mapping used for security policy and configuration. A subject object activity matrix focuses on capturing actions and interactions during requirements analysis rather than defining security permissions for configuration.

When you see matrix artifacts on the exam look for wording that emphasizes actions or activities between actors and resources. Be wary of options that shift the focus to design or implementation because those usually refer to later phases.

The correct answer is Deploying patches to remediate vulnerabilities.

Deploying patches to remediate vulnerabilities refers to making code or configuration changes that remove identified security flaws. Patching updates vulnerable components fixes faulty logic or adjusts settings so an issue can no longer be exploited and it is therefore the remediation step in the vulnerability management lifecycle.

Verification procedures are steps to confirm that a fix or change works as intended and they do not themselves change code or configuration. Verification normally occurs after remediation to ensure the patch was effective.

Certification assessment evaluates whether systems meet security or compliance requirements and it does not perform code or configuration changes to eliminate vulnerabilities. Certification documents or approves security posture but it is not the remediation action.

Validation testing checks that functionality and security behave as expected after changes and it does not by itself remove vulnerabilities. Validation is typically performed after patches are applied to ensure no new issues were introduced.

When reading choices look for words that indicate actual change to code or settings. Emphasize remediate and patch when choosing the action that eliminates a vulnerability.

The correct options are Access rights assigned by resource owners and Individual user accounts.

Access rights assigned by resource owners is the defining feature of discretionary access control because owners of resources grant and revoke permissions at their discretion. Individual user accounts are required so that owners can assign rights to specific identities and so that access decisions and accountability can be enforced for each user.

Service accounts is incorrect because special or automated accounts are not a fundamental requirement of the DAC model. They may exist in an environment that uses DAC but they are not required to establish the model.

Static data classification labels is incorrect because fixed labels are characteristic of mandatory access control where labels and clearances determine access. DAC relies on owner assigned permissions rather than on data sensitivity labels.

Read the phrasing that tells you who assigns permissions and whether identities are individual accounts. If owners assign rights and access is granted to specific user accounts then the answer points to discretionary access control.

The correct answers are Identified threats to the application and Planned mitigation measures that remove or reduce exposures.

Documenting Identified threats to the application means recording specific attack scenarios, threat agents, and vulnerable components so the development team can assess likelihood and impact and prioritize remediation efforts.

Recording Planned mitigation measures that remove or reduce exposures captures the proposed design changes, controls, and compensating measures that will reduce risk and provide traceability from each threat to the chosen countermeasure.

How components relate within the architecture is not the best answer here because component relationships and diagrams are contextual inputs that help discover threats but they are not the actual list of threats or the mitigation plans that threat modeling should produce.

The application interfaces with other systems is also an input describing attack surfaces and trust boundaries, and it helps drive the analysis, but it is not the documented set of threats or the planned mitigations that the team must identify during threat modeling.

When the exam asks about outcomes of threat modeling focus on the outputs such as threats and mitigations rather than on the architectural diagrams which are inputs.

The correct options are Provide a common numeric score to prioritize remediation work and Estimate the likely impact and severity of a vulnerability.

An industry standard scoring framework gives each vulnerability a repeatable numeric value that teams can use to prioritize remediation across many findings. That numeric score supports consistent decision making and resource allocation when there are more issues than the team can immediately fix.

The scoring model also captures attributes that reflect potential impact and severity so analysts can estimate how a vulnerability might affect confidentiality, integrity, or availability. Those impact and severity estimates help set remediation urgency and guide risk-based choices.

Standardize documentation of the entire software development lifecycle is incorrect because scoring frameworks are focused on measuring and communicating vulnerability severity rather than documenting process steps across development.

Maintain an inventory of code bugs and security vulnerabilities is incorrect because the scoring system provides severity ratings but does not itself act as an inventory or tracking database. Teams typically store and track findings in a vulnerability management platform or ticketing system and attach scores to those records.

When a question mentions a scoring framework focus on answers about numeric prioritization and impact estimation. Scoring describes severity not inventory or full lifecycle documentation.

Compiler switches are command line arguments that modify the compiler’s behavior during compilation is correct.

These switches are options passed to the compiler when you invoke it and they change how the compiler processes source code. They control things such as optimization level, warning and error reporting, generation of debug symbols, include and library search paths, language standard or dialect selection, and the name or format of output files.

Cloud Build is incorrect because that name refers to a build or CI service and not to a compiler command line argument. A build service may call compilers, but it is not itself a compiler switch.

Compiler switches are used mainly to provide extra runtime debugging output while the program executes is incorrect because switches operate at compile time. They can embed debug information and affect optimizations, but they do not directly cause the program to produce extra runtime logging while it runs.

Compiler switches determine which programming language a project is written in is incorrect because the programming language is determined by the source code and the compiler you choose. Switches can select a standard or dialect within a language, but they do not change the language the project is written in.

Look for wording that ties an option to compile time versus runtime. If the choice mentions changing how the compiler runs it is likely correct for questions about compiler switches.

End to end system integration is not normally treated as part of an operational risk assessment.

Operational risk assessments at a midsize firm focus on risks that affect ongoing operations and business continuity. These assessments typically consider factors that can cause service interruptions or legal exposure. End to end system integration is primarily an engineering and testing activity and it belongs to project level risk management and acceptance testing rather than to routine operational risk reviews.

Regulatory and legal compliance is usually covered because failures in compliance can lead to fines, litigation, and operational constraints and it informs policy and control requirements.

Operator competency and training is usually covered because human error is a frequent cause of incidents and assessments look for gaps in skills and procedures that affect day to day operations.

Deployment environment and topology is usually covered because the physical and network deployment determine availability, redundancy, and exposure and these factors are central to operational resilience.

Look for choices that describe project or engineering activities when the question asks about operational assessments and favor options that describe ongoing operational risks such as people, environment, or compliance.

All ISC2 question come from my CSSLP Udemy Course and certificationexams.pro

The correct answer is Nonrepudiation. This security property guarantees that a user cannot later deny having performed a specific action on a resource.

Nonrepudiation is achieved by creating verifiable and tamper resistant evidence that links an action to an identity and a time. Typical mechanisms include digital signatures that cryptographically bind the actor to the action, secure timestamps, and protected audit records with strong access and integrity controls.

Layered defense refers to using multiple overlapping security controls to reduce risk. It improves overall security posture but it does not itself prevent a user from denying they performed a specific action.

Cloud Audit Logs provide records of events and are useful evidence when investigating actions. They are a supporting mechanism and do not by themselves guarantee nonrepudiation unless the logs are protected and made cryptographically verifiable.

Division of responsibilities means separating duties to reduce fraud and errors. That control enhances accountability but it is not the same as providing cryptographic proof that an individual performed a particular action.

When a question asks which property stops a user from denying an action think nonrepudiation and look for answers that mention digital signatures or provable tamper resistant evidence.

The correct option is Software components with precise version identifiers.

Software components with precise version identifiers is correct because software configuration management is concerned with identifying, recording, and controlling the exact components that make up a build and their versions. This control provides reproducible builds, clear change traceability, and the ability to reproduce or roll back specific releases.

Setup and configuration instructions are important supporting documentation but they are not the primary objects that SCM records and controls. They may be stored with the configuration but they do not define the build components and their versions.

Complete source code listings can be part of what a configuration management system stores, but the phrase is misleading. SCM focuses on managing components and their precise version identifiers rather than simply keeping listings of source files.

User acceptance criteria are requirements and test acceptance items and they belong to requirements and testing processes. They are not elements of a software build that SCM records and controls.

When answering SCM questions look for mentions of version identifiers or component control because SCM is about tracking and reproducing exact builds.

Security and audit logs is the correct option.

Security and audit logs provide the primary record of system and user activity that security architects need to detect threats respond to incidents and perform forensic investigations. Logs supply time stamped evidence of events across systems and networks and they support monitoring alerting compliance and retrospective analysis.

Establishing logging as a priority ensures that log collection centralization retention and access controls are designed into the architecture rather than bolted on later. That makes detection and incident response more effective and it also helps meet regulatory and audit requirements.

Input validation routines are important for secure coding and preventing injection and other application level attacks. They are not the primary artifact asked for in this question because they are application controls rather than a record of system events.

Identity and access management policies define who may access what and under what conditions and they are essential for a secure architecture. The question asks about a record or artifact to establish as a priority and IAM policies are governance artifacts while logs are the operational records needed for detection and auditing.

Change control processes provide structure for modifying systems and maintaining integrity and they are important for security change management. They are processes and supporting documentation so they do not serve as the continuous evidence stream that audit logs provide for monitoring and incident response.

When a question asks for a record or artifact prioritize items that create continuous evidence for monitoring and investigation. Exams often expect you to choose logs when comparing records to policies or processes.

The correct answer is Establishing the source and authenticity of software components.

Checking pedigree and provenance is primarily about proving who produced a component and that the binary or library has not been tampered with. Provenance records provide cryptographic hashes signatures build metadata and authorship information that let OakPay confirm that a dependency actually came from the claimed source and that it is the expected artifact.

Maintaining provenance supports trust decisions before release because it reduces the risk of supply chain compromise or insertion of malicious code. Techniques include signed artifacts reproducible builds and recorded build metadata which together establish authenticity and integrity for third party libraries.

Recording changes across the build and development lifecycle is related but not the primary goal. That activity focuses on change management and audit trails rather than proving the origin and integrity of a delivered component.

Binary Authorization is a policy enforcement mechanism used to allow or deny running artifacts in a deployment environment. It complements provenance checks but it is not the same as establishing the source and authenticity of components.

Detecting unauthorized distribution or copyright infringement is a legal and distribution concern that provenance data may help investigate. The main purpose of pedigree and provenance checks is to verify origin and integrity rather than to determine copyright status or distribution violations.

When a question mentions pedigree or provenance think about verifying origin and authenticity of software artifacts rather than change logs or runtime enforcement.

The correct answer is Regression testing.

Regression testing is the process of retesting previously working functionality after changes such as patches or updates to ensure that no existing features have been broken. It commonly involves rerunning a suite of tests across multiple released builds or versions to verify stability and to uncover unintended side effects introduced by the change.

Fuzz testing is not correct because it supplies random or malformed inputs to software to uncover crashes and memory errors rather than systematically retesting existing functionality across builds.

Penetration testing is not correct because it simulates attacks to find security vulnerabilities and weaknesses rather than focusing on verifying that prior features still work after a patch.

Canary testing is not correct because it refers to rolling out a new build to a small subset of users to observe behavior in production rather than explicitly retesting multiple released builds to confirm previously working functionality.

When a question asks about confirming that existing features still work after a patch look for the phrase regression testing and eliminate answers that describe security testing, random input testing, or phased deployments.

Security requirements mapped to their originating artifacts such as use cases and user stories is correct. A Security Requirements Traceability Matrix is intended to show the link between each security requirement and the artifact that produced it so you can trace why the requirement exists and what it relates to.

The matrix maps requirements back to source artifacts like use cases, user stories, design documents, regulatory references, and test cases so you can perform impact analysis, verify coverage, and maintain alignment as the system evolves. This mapping is the defining characteristic of a traceability matrix and it supports validation and change control.

Security requirements aligned with documented misuse and abuse scenarios is not the best choice because alignment with misuse cases is part of threat modeling and requirements derivation rather than the core purpose of a traceability matrix. The matrix documents origins and relationships broadly and not only misuse or abuse scenarios.

Functional requirements linked with non functional requirements such as performance or availability is also incorrect because that statement describes relationships between requirement types rather than tracing security requirements back to originating artifacts. A traceability matrix focuses on origin and coverage rather than correlating functional and non functional properties.

Security requirements associated with data ownership and stewardship assignments is incorrect because ownership metadata may be recorded elsewhere but it is not the primary aim of a Security Requirements Traceability Matrix. The matrix emphasizes where requirements came from and what they map to rather than who owns specific data or stewardship roles.

When you see a question about a traceability matrix focus on whether it shows the originating artifacts of requirements and how they are mapped rather than whether it lists owners or performance metrics.

Address different facets of protection is the correct option.

Access control models describe different facets of protection because they define the conceptual ways to decide who can do what under which conditions. Examples include discretionary access control mandatory access control role based access control and attribute based access control. These models guide how policies are expressed and how enforcement mechanisms should be designed to protect confidentiality integrity availability and separation of duties.

Act as general policy frameworks is incorrect because models are not merely vague frameworks. They provide specific patterns for how access decisions are made and enforced and they inform policy rather than replace it.

Map to authentication and authorization mechanisms is incorrect because models are conceptual approaches to authorization and they do not directly map to authentication. Authentication establishes identity and authorization implements the model. The model guides authorization design but it is not the same as the mechanisms used for authentication.

Identify single points of failure is incorrect because access control models are about decision logic and policy scope. Whether a particular implementation has a single point of failure depends on architecture and deployment choices rather than the model itself.

When a choice mentions models think about whether it describes a conceptual scope or an implementation detail. Choose the option that frames access control as different facets of protection rather than as a specific mechanism or an architecture flaw.

Include security mechanisms when they are reachable from public networks is correct.

Industrial control systems like SCADA were typically built for a single purpose and they often lack protections assumed in IT environments. When these systems are reachable from the Internet they must provide security mechanisms such as strong authentication, encryption, network segmentation, access controls, timely patching, and continuous monitoring so that remote reachability does not allow unauthorized commands or unsafe manipulation of physical processes.

Practical controls for exposed systems include secure remote access gateways or jump hosts, VPNs, least privilege for accounts, strict firewall and protocol filtering rules, and logging and intrusion detection tailored to industrial protocols. These measures address the increased attack surface that comes from Internet exposure.

Provide an intuitive operator interface that makes field control straightforward is incorrect because ease of operator use is a design goal but it does not address the specific requirement created by Internet exposure. The question asks what capability must be provided when systems are reachable externally and that is security.

Use Cloud Pub/Sub is incorrect because Cloud Pub/Sub is a specific cloud messaging service and it is not a required capability for SCADA systems when they are exposed to public networks. Security mechanisms are required regardless of the messaging or cloud technologies used.

Maintain physical or logical links to the sensors and actuators they supervise is incorrect because maintaining links to sensors and actuators is a core functional requirement of any control system. It does not answer what additional capability is required when the system is reachable from external networks.

On questions about industrial control systems focus on whether the option addresses security when exposed to external networks rather than normal operational features or specific cloud products.

The correct answer is Undocumented application programming interfaces.

Undocumented application programming interfaces are hidden or forgotten endpoints that are not part of the published interface of an application and they often escape design reviews and security testing. These interfaces can expose sensitive functions or data without the expected authentication and authorization controls and they may lack logging and monitoring which makes them attractive targets for attackers.

Because these endpoints are hidden defenders must include discovery scans code reviews and runtime monitoring to find and protect them. Controls include strict authentication and authorization robust input validation rate limiting and audit logging and an explicit deprecation and removal process for any undocumented API.

Hardcoded configuration values are a security weakness but they are not a hidden interface. They refer to secrets or settings embedded in code and they require different controls such as secret management and code scans rather than the discovery and interface protections needed for undocumented APIs.

Cryptographic agility is a design property that allows swapping cryptographic algorithms and libraries and it is a security best practice rather than a hidden interface. It does not describe an interface that attackers use as an entry point so it is not the correct choice.

Managed runtime components such as runtime libraries and virtual machines can have vulnerabilities but they are not by definition hidden application interfaces. They are infrastructure elements that need patching and configuration management rather than the special discovery and access controls used for undocumented APIs.

When a question mentions a hidden or unlisted interface think about undocumented APIs and choose the option that describes a hidden endpoint rather than general implementation details.

The correct option is Correctness.

Installation criteria are intended to confirm that the software was installed as specified and that the installed product actually implements the required functions and configuration in the target environment. These criteria focus on verifying that files, settings, dependencies, and services are present and behave as expected immediately after installation so that the deployment is correct.

Performance is incorrect because performance concerns relate to speed, throughput, and resource usage under load and those attributes are measured by performance testing rather than by installation criteria.

Usability is incorrect because usability addresses the end user experience of the application and its interface and it is evaluated with usability or user acceptance tests rather than with installation checks.

Reliability is incorrect because reliability concerns the long term stability and fault tolerance of the software and it is assessed through reliability and stress testing over time rather than by initial installation verification.

When a question asks about installation or deployment checks think about whether the tests verify that the product was put in place and configured correctly and focus on functional correctness rather than on performance, usability, or long term reliability.