Cyber Monday 2024! Hurry Up, Grab the Special Discount - Save 25% - Ends In 00:00:00 Coupon code: SAVE25
Welcome to Pass4Success

- Free Preparation Discussions

Eccouncil Exam 312-38 Topic 3 Question 95 Discussion

Actual exam question for Eccouncil's 312-38 exam
Question #: 95
Topic #: 3
[All 312-38 Questions]

Contribute your Thoughts:

Chana
2 months ago
Hah, this one's a no-brainer! C is the answer, hands down. Gotta love a good ol' low interaction honeypot to keep the bad guys at bay.
upvoted 0 times
...
Rupert
2 months ago
Low interaction honeypots, huh? That's a pretty clever way to handle things. Gotta stay one step ahead of those pesky hackers, am I right?
upvoted 0 times
Shonda
9 days ago
Absolutely, it's important to have measures in place to protect against potential attacks.
upvoted 0 times
...
Buddy
21 days ago
I agree, Ryan is being proactive by implementing a low interaction honeypot like Kojoney.
upvoted 0 times
...
Dalene
1 months ago
Definitely, it's all about staying ahead of the game when it comes to network security.
upvoted 0 times
...
Mirta
1 months ago
Yes, low interaction honeypots are a great way to gather information without risking too much.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Corinne
2 months ago
C definitely seems like the answer here. Emulating vulnerabilities without exposing the real system? Clever move, Ryan!
upvoted 0 times
...
Jade
2 months ago
Ooh, this one's tricky! But I reckon C is the way to go. Gotta keep those hackers on their toes, am I right?
upvoted 0 times
Linsey
28 days ago
User 3: Definitely, we need to stay one step ahead of them.
upvoted 0 times
...
Gregoria
1 months ago
Yeah, I agree. It's important to keep the hackers guessing.
upvoted 0 times
...
Paola
1 months ago
I think C is the best choice. Low interaction honeypots are safer.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Thad
2 months ago
Hmm, I think C is the correct answer. Low interaction honeypots are designed to emulate services and vulnerabilities, making it a safer and more flexible option.
upvoted 0 times
Socorro
25 days ago
Using a low interaction honeypot like Kojoney is a smart move for network security.
upvoted 0 times
...
Isadora
26 days ago
I think Ryan made a good choice with the low interaction honeypot. It's safer and more flexible.
upvoted 0 times
...
Stevie
1 months ago
I agree, C is the correct answer. Low interaction honeypots are less risky to deploy.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Floyd
2 months ago
I think Ryan should go for a research honeypot to gather more information about the attack.
upvoted 0 times
...
Viola
2 months ago
I believe he is going for a low interaction honeypot to emulate the network vulnerability.
upvoted 0 times
...
Therese
3 months ago
I think Ryan is trying to implement a high interaction honeypot.
upvoted 0 times
...
Ming
3 months ago
Haha, I bet Ryan's users are going to have a real 'honey' of a time dealing with this attack! C is the correct answer, for sure.
upvoted 0 times
...
Cristy
3 months ago
Definitely C. Low interaction honeypots are designed to emulate services and vulnerabilities, which is exactly what Kojoney is doing in this case.
upvoted 0 times
...
Johnna
3 months ago
I think the answer is C) Low interaction honeypots. Kojoney is a low-interaction honeypot, which means it emulates the network vulnerability rather than the real system, making it safer and more flexible.
upvoted 0 times
Kayleigh
1 months ago
Yes, honeypots can vary in their level of interaction and purpose.
upvoted 0 times
...
Bernadine
1 months ago
That's interesting. I didn't know there were different types of honeypots.
upvoted 0 times
...
Winifred
2 months ago
Yes, you are correct. Kojoney is indeed a low-interaction honeypot.
upvoted 0 times
...
Catalina
2 months ago
I think the answer is C) Low interaction honeypots.
upvoted 0 times
...
...

Save Cancel
az-700  pass4success  az-104  200-301  200-201  cissp  350-401  350-201  350-501  350-601  350-801  350-901  az-720  az-305  pl-300  

Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /pass.php:70) in /pass.php on line 77