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

VMware Exam 5V0-93.22 Topic 9 Question 20 Discussion

Actual exam question for VMware's 5V0-93.22 exam
Question #: 20
Topic #: 9
[All 5V0-93.22 Questions]

An administrator has configured a terminate rule to prevent an application from running. The administrator wants to confirm that the new rule would have prevented a previous execution that had been observed.

Which feature should the administrator leverage for this purpose?

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: B

Contribute your Thoughts:

Corazon
4 months ago
B) Utilize the Test rule link from within the rule. This is the way to go! No need to actually terminate the process, just test that the rule would work. It's like a dress rehearsal for your cybersecurity play.
upvoted 0 times
Hassie
3 months ago
Andree: Definitely, better to be safe than sorry when it comes to cybersecurity measures.
upvoted 0 times
...
Andree
3 months ago
Agreed, it's like a practice run to make sure everything is working as expected.
upvoted 0 times
...
Wava
3 months ago
I think option B is the best choice. Testing the rule without actually terminating the process is a smart move.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Andree
4 months ago
A) Setup a notification based on a policy action, and then select Terminate. Interesting idea, but do I really want to get a notification every time the app tries to run? Seems like overkill.
upvoted 0 times
...
Ruth
4 months ago
D) Configure the rule to deny operation of the process. Hmm, I guess that's one way to do it, but wouldn't that just make the application refuse to run altogether? Where's the fun in that?
upvoted 0 times
Phyliss
3 months ago
D) Configure the rule to deny operation of the process. That's true, it might be a bit extreme to completely deny the operation.
upvoted 0 times
...
Elouise
3 months ago
C) Configure the rule to terminate the process.
upvoted 0 times
...
Evelynn
3 months ago
B) Utilize the Test rule link from within the rule.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lashanda
4 months ago
A) Setup a notification based on a policy action, and then select Terminate.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Alba
4 months ago
I think configuring the rule to deny operation of the process would be the most effective way to prevent the application from running.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lavera
5 months ago
I believe setting up a notification based on a policy action and selecting Terminate could also be a good option.
upvoted 0 times
...
Dorcas
5 months ago
I agree with Karan, testing the rule would be the best way to confirm its effectiveness.
upvoted 0 times
...
Timothy
5 months ago
C) Configure the rule to terminate the process. This is the most straightforward way to prevent the application from running, and the administrator can then review the logs to confirm it would have worked.
upvoted 0 times
Shaquana
4 months ago
B) Utilize the Test rule link from within the rule.
upvoted 0 times
...
Shaquana
4 months ago
C) Configure the rule to terminate the process.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Karan
5 months ago
I think the administrator should utilize the Test rule link from within the rule.
upvoted 0 times
...
Billye
5 months ago
B) Utilize the Test rule link from within the rule. This allows the administrator to test the rule without actually terminating the application, which is exactly what they need to confirm the rule's effectiveness.
upvoted 0 times
Layla
4 months ago
It's important to make sure the rule works as intended before fully implementing it.
upvoted 0 times
...
Francis
4 months ago
That's a smart way to confirm the rule's effectiveness without actually terminating the application.
upvoted 0 times
...
Jamey
4 months ago
Yes, I used the Test rule link to see if it would have prevented the previous execution.
upvoted 0 times
...
Jerry
4 months ago
Have you tried testing the rule before implementing it?
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