How to Easily Pass the ISC CISSP Exam: Expert Advice

Equivalence class testing is a software testing technique that divides the input domain of a program into a finite number of equivalence classes, or partitions, based on the expected behavior or output of the program. An equivalence class is a set of inputs that are equivalent in terms of satisfying the same condition or producing the same result. The main idea of equivalence class testing is that an entire partition can be covered by considering only one representative value from that partition, as all the values in the same partition are expected to behave the same way. This can reduce the number of test cases and increase the test coverage and efficiency. References: CISSP All-in-One Exam Guide, Eighth Edition, Chapter 8: Software Development Security, page 389; [Official (ISC)2 CISSP CBK Reference, Fifth Edition, Chapter 8: Software Development Security, page 529]

Due diligence is the process of gathering and analyzing information about the target organization before a merger or acquisition. The primary purpose of due diligence is to assess the business risks and opportunities associated with the transaction, such as financial, legal, operational, technical, and security aspects. Due diligence helps the acquiring organization to make informed decisions, negotiate better terms, and avoid potential liabilities or pitfalls. Due diligence is not meant to formulate alternative strategies, determine that all parties are equally protected, or provide adequate capability for all parties, although these may be secondary outcomes or objectives of the process. References: CISSP All-in-One Exam Guide, Eighth Edition, Chapter 1: Security and Risk Management, page 49. Official (ISC)² CISSP CBK Reference, Fifth Edition, Domain 1: Security and Risk Management, page 75.

 Network architecture is the factor that is used to divide trust domain and trust boundaries for the purpose of classification. A trust domain is a logical grouping of systems or networks that share a common security policy and trust level. A trust boundary is the border or the interface between two trust domains that have different security policies or trust levels. For the purpose of classification, trust domains and trust boundaries are used to define the scope and the level of protection for the information that is transmitted or stored within or across the domains. Network architecture is the factor that determines how the trust domains and trust boundaries are established and maintained, as it defines the physical and logical layout, the connectivity, the topology, the devices, and the protocols of the network. Network architecture can affect the security and the performance of the network, and influence the design and the implementation of the security controls and the encryption mechanisms for the information that flows through the network. References: CISSP All-in-One Exam Guide, Eighth Edition, Chapter 4: Communication and Network Security, page 143. CISSP Testking ISC Exam Questions, Question 10.

 The three key benefits that application developers should derive from the northbound application-programming interface (API) of software-defined networking (SDN) are familiar syntax, abstraction of network topology, and abstraction of network protocols. A northbound API is an API that enables the communication and interaction between the SDN controller and the applications or services that run on the network. A northbound API provides the following benefits for the application developers:

• Familiar syntax: A northbound API uses a common and standard programming language, such as Java, Python, or REST, that the application developers are familiar with and comfortable with. This reduces the learning curve and the complexity of developing applications for the SDN network.
• Abstraction of network topology: A northbound API hides the details and complexity of the underlying network infrastructure, such as devices, links, addresses, and routes, from the application developers. Instead, it provides a high-level and logical view of the network resources and capabilities, such as bandwidth, latency, and QoS, that the application developers can use and manipulate. This simplifies the application development and deployment, and enables the application developers to focus on the functionality and performance of the applications.
• Abstraction of network protocols: A northbound API abstracts the network protocols, such as TCP, IP, or OpenFlow, that are used to control and manage the network devices and traffic, from the application developers. Instead, it provides a uniform and consistent interface and commands that the application developers can use to request and receive network services and information. This enhances the portability and interoperability of the applications, and enables the application developers to leverage the network intelligence and optimization provided by the SDN controller34. References: CISSP CBK, Fifth Edition, Chapter 4, page 348; 2024 Pass4itsure CISSP Dumps, Question 10.

The type of vulnerabilities that can be best detected using automated analysis is typical source code vulnerabilities. Automated analysis is a technique that uses automated tools or software to analyze or test a system or an application, and to identify or report any errors, defects, or vulnerabilities. Automated analysis can be performed at different stages of the system or application development life cycle, such as design, coding, testing, or deployment. Typical source code vulnerabilities are the vulnerabilities that are common or frequent in the source code of a system or an application, and that are caused by coding errors, mistakes, or bad practices, such as buffer overflow, integer overflow, memory leak, or hard-coded credentials. Typical source code vulnerabilities can be best detected using automated analysis, as they can be easily scanned, checked, or verified by the automated tools or software, and they can be reported or corrected in a timely and efficient manner. Valid cross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerabilities, multi-step process attack vulnerabilities, or business logic flaw vulnerabilities are not the types of vulnerabilities that can be best detected using automated analysis, as they are more complex or specific in the system or the application, and they may require human intervention or judgment to analyze or test. Valid CSRF vulnerabilities are the vulnerabilities that allow an attacker to force a web browser to perform an unwanted or malicious action on a web server, such as transferring funds, changing passwords, or updating profiles, by exploiting the trust between the web browser and the web server. Multi-step process attack vulnerabilities are the vulnerabilities that allow an attacker to compromise a system or an application that involves multiple steps or stages, such as authentication, authorization, or transaction, by exploiting the weaknesses or gaps in each step or stage. Business logic flaw vulnerabilities are the vulnerabilities that allow an attacker to manipulate or bypass the business rules or the logic of a system or an application, such as workflows, validations, or calculations, by exploiting the flaws or errors in the design or the implementation of the system or the application. References: Official (ISC)2 Guide to the CISSP CBK, Fifth Edition, Chapter 21: Software Development Security, page 2010.

Software assurance is a process of ensuring that the software systems or applications meet the quality, reliability, and security standards and requirements of the organization and the stakeholders. Software assurance can be applied throughout the software development life cycle, from planning to deployment to maintenance. A generic acquisition process is a process of procuring software systems or applications from external vendors or contractors. A generic acquisition process typically consists of four phases: initiation, solicitation, evaluation, and award. The first phase of software assurance in a generic acquisition process is developing software requirements to be included in the work statement. The software requirements define the functional and non-functional specifications, expectations, and constraints of the software system or application, such as performance, usability, security, or compliance. Developing software requirements is a critical step for software assurance, as it helps to establish the scope, objectives, and criteria for the software acquisition. Establishing and consenting to the contract work schedule, issuing a Request for Proposal (RFP) with a work statement, or reviewing and accepting software deliverables are not the first steps of software assurance in a generic acquisition process, as they are more related to the later phases of solicitation, evaluation, or award. References: CISSP All-in-One Exam Guide, Eighth Edition, Chapter 21: Software Development Security, page 1173; CISSP Official (ISC)2 Practice Tests, Third Edition, Domain 8: Software Development Security, Question 8.13, page 306.

The best design for securing physical perimeter protection is Crime Prevention through Environmental Design (CPTED). CPTED is a design philosophy that applies environmental and architectural principles to deter or prevent criminal activities and enhance the security of a physical location. CPTED is based on four main concepts: natural surveillance, natural access control, territorial reinforcement, and maintenance. Natural surveillance is the use of lighting, windows, landscaping, and other features to increase the visibility and awareness of the surroundings. Natural access control is the use of doors, locks, fences, gates, and other barriers to limit or restrict the access to a location. Territorial reinforcement is the use of signs, symbols, colors, and other elements to define and mark the boundaries and ownership of a location. Maintenance is the use of cleaning, repairing, and updating the environment to convey a sense of care and order. CPTED can help to reduce the opportunities and motivations for crime, increase the sense of safety and security, and improve the quality of life. The other options are not the best design for securing physical perimeter protection, as they either do not apply environmental and architectural principles, do not address all the aspects of security, or do not prevent or deter crime. References: CISSP - Certified Information Systems Security Professional, Domain 3. Security Architecture and Engineering, 3.4 Implement and manage physical security, 3.4.1 Apply physical security, 3.4.1.1 Crime Prevention through Environmental Design (CPTED); CISSP Exam Outline, Domain 3. Security Architecture and Engineering, 3.4 Implement and manage physical security, 3.4.1 Apply physical security, 3.4.1.1 Crime Prevention through Environmental Design (CPTED)

 The order in which the information security professional must consider the factors when resolving ethical conflicts is public safety, duties to individuals, duties to the profession, and duties to principals. Ethics are the principles or standards that guide the conduct or behavior of a person or a group. Ethics are important for the information security profession, as the information security professionals have the responsibility to protect the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the information and systems they manage or access, and to ensure the trust and confidence of the stakeholders and the society. The information security professionals may face ethical conflicts or dilemmas, which are situations where there are two or more choices that have different ethical implications or consequences, and no clear or easy solution. When resolving ethical conflicts, the information security professional must consider the following factors, in the order of priority:

• Public safety: The information security professional must protect the health, safety, and welfare of the public, and avoid any actions or decisions that could harm or endanger the public.
• Duties to individuals: The information security professional must respect the rights, privacy, and dignity of the individuals, and avoid any actions or decisions that could harm or discriminate the individuals.
• Duties to the profession: The information security professional must uphold the reputation, integrity, and competence of the profession, and follow the code of ethics and standards of practice of the profession.
• Duties to principals: The information security professional must act in the best interest of the principals, such as the employers, clients, or customers, and fulfill the contractual obligations and fiduciary duties to the principals. References: CISSP All-in-One Exam Guide, Chapter 1: Security and Risk Management, Section: Professional Ethics, pp. 29-30.

 The best solution to mitigate the risk of unauthorized access to the cloud-based Identity and Access Management (IAM) service provider is to install an on-premise Authentication Gateway Service (AGS) in front of the service provider. A cloud-based IAM service provider is a service provider that offers IAM services, such as authentication, authorization, or identity management, to the customers or clients, by using the cloud computing model, such as Software as a Service (SaaS), Platform as a Service (PaaS), or Infrastructure as a Service (IaaS). A cloud-based IAM service provider can provide various benefits, such as scalability, flexibility, or cost-effectiveness, for the customers or clients that need to manage or secure the access or use of their systems, networks, or resources, by the users, devices, or processes. However, a cloud-based IAM service provider can also pose various security risks, such as unauthorized access, data leakage, or service disruption, for the customers or clients that rely on the cloud-based IAM service provider for their IAM needs, as the cloud-based IAM service provider may not have the same level of security, trust, or control as the customers or clients. Therefore, a cloud-based IAM service provider should be protected and secured by using various security measures or solutions, such as encryption, auditing, or monitoring, to ensure the security and reliability of the cloud-based IAM service provider, as well as the customers’ or clients’ systems, networks, or resources. The best solution to mitigate the risk of unauthorized access to the cloud-based IAM service provider is to install an on-premise Authentication Gateway Service (AGS) in front of the service provider. An AGS is a security service or function that acts as a proxy or intermediary between the customers or clients and the cloud-based IAM service provider, by performing the authentication or verification of the users, devices, or processes that request or access the cloud-based IAM service provider, as well as by enforcing the security policies or rules that govern the access or use of the cloud-based IAM service provider. An AGS can help to mitigate the risk of unauthorized access to the cloud-based IAM service provider, by providing an additional layer or level of security, trust, or control for the customers or clients, as well as by reducing the dependency or vulnerability of the customers or clients on the cloud-based IAM service provider. Requiring the cloud IAM service provider to use declarative security instead of programmatic authentication checks, integrating a Web-Application Firewall (WAF) in reverse-proxy mode in front of the service provider, or applying Transport Layer Security (TLS) to the cloud-based authentication checks are not the best solutions to mitigate the risk of unauthorized access to the cloud-based IAM service provider, as they are either more related to the security mechanisms or functions that are implemented or provided by the cloud-based IAM service provider itself, rather than by the customers or clients, or to the security protocols or standards that are used or applied to the communication or connection between the customers or clients and the cloud-based IAM service provider, rather than to the authentication or verification of the users, devices, or processes that request or access the cloud-based IAM service provider. References: CISSP All-in-One Exam Guide, Eighth Edition, Chapter 5: Identity and Access Management, page 300; CISSP Official (ISC)2 Practice Tests, Third Edition, Domain 5: Identity and Access Management, Question 5.12, page 222.

A key performance indicator (KPI) is a metric that measures the effectiveness and efficiency of an organization’s processes, activities, and outcomes. KPIs are used to evaluate the progress and performance of the organization against its strategic goals and objectives. KPIs can include items such as revenue, customer satisfaction, market share, productivity, quality, and innovation. KPIs can help an organization identify its strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats, as well as align its resources and actions with its vision and mission. References:

• 1 (Domain 1: Security and Risk Management, Objective 1.2: Evaluate and apply security governance principles)
• 2 (Chapter 1: Security and Risk Management, Section 1.2.2: Organizational Processes)

The security service that is served by the process of encrypting plaintext with the sender’s private key and decrypting ciphertext with the sender’s public key is identification. Identification is the process of verifying the identity of a person or entity that claims to be who or what it is. Identification can be achieved by using public key cryptography and digital signatures, which are based on the process of encrypting plaintext with the sender’s private key and decrypting ciphertext with the sender’s public key. This process works as follows:

• The sender has a pair of public and private keys, and the public key is shared with the receiver in advance.
• The sender encrypts the plaintext message with its private key, which produces a ciphertext that is also a digital signature of the message.
• The sender sends the ciphertext to the receiver, along with the plaintext message or a hash of the message.
• The receiver decrypts the ciphertext with the sender’s public key, which produces the same plaintext message or hash of the message.
• The receiver compares the decrypted message or hash with the original message or hash, and verifies the identity of the sender if they match.

The process of encrypting plaintext with the sender’s private key and decrypting ciphertext with the sender’s public key serves identification because it ensures that only the sender can produce a valid ciphertext that can be decrypted by the receiver, and that the receiver can verify the sender’s identity by using the sender’s public key. This process also provides non-repudiation, which means that the sender cannot deny sending the message or the receiver cannot deny receiving the message, as the ciphertext serves as a proof of origin and delivery.

The other options are not the security services that are served by the process of encrypting plaintext with the sender’s private key and decrypting ciphertext with the sender’s public key. Confidentiality is the process of ensuring that the message is only readable by the intended parties, and it is achieved by encrypting plaintext with the receiver’s public key and decrypting ciphertext with the receiver’s private key. Integrity is the process of ensuring that the message is not modified or corrupted during transmission, and it is achieved by using hash functions and message authentication codes. Availability is the process of ensuring that the message is accessible and usable by the authorized parties, and it is achieved by using redundancy, backup, and recovery mechanisms.

 Code signing is the mobile code security model that relies only on trust. Mobile code is a type of software that can be transferred from one system to another and executed without installation or compilation. Mobile code can be used for various purposes, such as web applications, applets, scripts, macros, etc. Mobile code can also pose various security risks, such as malicious code, unauthorized access, data leakage, etc. Mobile code security models are the techniques that are used to protect the systems and users from the threats of mobile code. Code signing is a mobile code security model that relies only on trust, which means that the security of the mobile code depends on the reputation and credibility of the code provider. Code signing works as follows:

• The code provider has a pair of public and private keys, and obtains a digital certificate from a trusted third party, such as a certificate authority (CA), that binds the public key to the identity of the code provider.
• The code provider signs the mobile code with its private key and attaches the digital certificate to the mobile code.
• The code consumer receives the mobile code and verifies the signature and the certificate with the public key of the code provider and the CA, respectively.
• The code consumer decides whether to trust and execute the mobile code based on the identity and reputation of the code provider.

Code signing relies only on trust because it does not enforce any security restrictions or controls on the mobile code, but rather leaves the decision to the code consumer. Code signing also does not guarantee the quality or functionality of the mobile code, but rather the authenticity and integrity of the code provider. Code signing can be effective if the code consumer knows and trusts the code provider, and if the code provider follows the security standards and best practices. However, code signing can also be ineffective if the code consumer is unaware or careless of the code provider, or if the code provider is compromised or malicious.

The other options are not mobile code security models that rely only on trust, but rather on other techniques that limit or isolate the mobile code. Class authentication is a mobile code security model that verifies the permissions and capabilities of the mobile code based on its class or type, and allows or denies the execution of the mobile code accordingly. Sandboxing is a mobile code security model that executes the mobile code in a separate and restricted environment, and prevents the mobile code from accessing or affecting the system resources or data. Type safety is a mobile code security model that checks the validity and consistency of the mobile code, and prevents the mobile code from performing illegal or unsafe operations.

The component of the Security Content Automation Protocol (SCAP) specification that contains the data required to estimate the severity of vulnerabilities identified by automated vulnerability assessments is the Common Vulnerability Scoring System (CVSS). CVSS is a framework that provides a standardized and objective way to measure and communicate the characteristics and impacts of vulnerabilities. CVSS consists of three metric groups: base, temporal, and environmental. The base metric group captures the intrinsic and fundamental properties of a vulnerability that are constant over time and across user environments. The temporal metric group captures the characteristics of a vulnerability that change over time, such as the availability and effectiveness of exploits, patches, and workarounds. The environmental metric group captures the characteristics of a vulnerability that are relevant and unique to a user’s environment, such as the configuration and importance of the affected system. Each metric group has a set of metrics that are assigned values based on the vulnerability’s attributes. The values are then combined using a formula to produce a numerical score that ranges from 0 to 10, where 0 means no impact and 10 means critical impact. The score can also be translated into a qualitative rating that ranges from none to low, medium, high, and critical. CVSS provides a consistent and comprehensive way to estimate the severity of vulnerabilities and prioritize their remediation.

The other options are not components of the SCAP specification that contain the data required to estimate the severity of vulnerabilities identified by automated vulnerability assessments, but rather components that serve other purposes. Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures (CVE) is a component that provides a standardized and unique identifier and description for each publicly known vulnerability. CVE facilitates the sharing and comparison of vulnerability information across different sources and tools. Asset Reporting Format (ARF) is a component that provides a standardized and extensible format for expressing the information about the assets and their characteristics, such as configuration, vulnerabilities, and compliance. ARF enables the aggregation and correlation of asset information from different sources and tools. Open Vulnerability and Assessment Language (OVAL) is a component that provides a standardized and expressive language for defining and testing the state of a system for the presence of vulnerabilities, configuration issues, patches, and other aspects. OVAL enables the automation and interoperability of vulnerability assessment and management.

The second phase of Public Key Infrastructure (PKI) key/certificate life-cycle management is the initialization phase. PKI is a system that uses public key cryptography and digital certificates to provide authentication, confidentiality, integrity, and non-repudiation for electronic transactions. PKI key/certificate life-cycle management is the process of managing the creation, distribution, usage, storage, revocation, and expiration of keys and certificates in a PKI system. The key/certificate life-cycle management consists of six phases: pre-certification, initialization, certification, operational, suspension, and termination. The initialization phase is the second phase, where the key pair and the certificate request are generated by the end entity or the registration authority (RA). The initialization phase involves the following steps:

• The end entity or the RA generates a key pair, consisting of a public key and a private key, using a secure and random method.
• The end entity or the RA creates a certificate request, which contains the public key and other identity information of the end entity, such as the name, email, organization, etc.
• The end entity or the RA submits the certificate request to the certification authority (CA), which is the trusted entity that issues and signs the certificates in the PKI system.
• The end entity or the RA securely stores the private key and protects it from unauthorized access, loss, or compromise.

The other options are not the second phase of PKI key/certificate life-cycle management, but rather other phases. The implementation phase is not a phase of PKI key/certificate life-cycle management, but rather a phase of PKI system deployment, where the PKI components and policies are installed and configured. The cancellation phase is not a phase of PKI key/certificate life-cycle management, but rather a possible outcome of the termination phase, where the key pair and the certificate are permanently revoked and deleted. The issued phase is not a phase of PKI key/certificate life-cycle management, but rather a possible outcome of the certification phase, where the CA verifies and approves the certificate request and issues the certificate to the end entity or the RA.

Compressing the data before encryption is a technique that can be used to make an encryption scheme more resistant to a known plaintext attack. A known plaintext attack is a type of cryptanalysis where the attacker has access to some pairs of plaintext and ciphertext encrypted with the same key, and tries to recover the key or decrypt other ciphertexts. A known plaintext attack can exploit the statistical properties or patterns of the plaintext or the ciphertext to reduce the search space or guess the key. Compressing the data before encryption can reduce the redundancy and increase the entropy of the plaintext, making it harder for the attacker to find any correlations or similarities between the plaintext and the ciphertext. Compressing the data before encryption can also reduce the size of the plaintext, making it more difficult for the attacker to obtain enough plaintext-ciphertext pairs for a successful attack.

The other options are not techniques that can be used to make an encryption scheme more resistant to a known plaintext attack, but rather techniques that can introduce other security issues or inefficiencies. Hashing the data before encryption is not a useful technique, as hashing is a one-way function that cannot be reversed, and the encrypted hash cannot be decrypted to recover the original data. Hashing the data after encryption is also not a useful technique, as hashing does not add any security to the encryption, and the hash can be easily computed by anyone who has access to the ciphertext. Compressing the data after encryption is not a recommended technique, as compression algorithms usually work better on uncompressed data, and compressing the ciphertext can introduce errors or vulnerabilities that can compromise the encryption.