300-215 Exam Dumps - Cisco CyberOps Professional Questions and Answers

The string shown is long, alphanumeric, and includes both uppercase and lowercase letters with numbers—characteristics of Base64 encoding. This format is widely used to obfuscate payloads in malicious scripts, particularly in phishing or malware campaigns. Base64 encoding is also supported by Python and other platforms for data transformation.

—

The use of repetitive patterns in images is a known indicator of steganography, which is an anti-forensics technique used to hide malicious code or files inside seemingly benign content such as image or audio files. The repetitive patterns suggest that the image may contain embedded hidden data. This technique is particularly difficult to detect through conventional scanning or antivirus software.

According to theCyberOps Technologies (CBRFIR) 300-215 study guide, steganography is defined as “concealing malicious content or instructions within ordinary files such as .jpg, .png, or audio files, allowing the content to bypass security filters and reach the target system without detection”.

—

Since the phishing email originates from a known compromised cloud provider (XYZCloud), the correct immediate action for the security analyst is to determine the broader scope of exposure. This involves checking whether other users in the organization received similar emails from the same potentially malicious source. Therefore, querying for emails from theIP address rangesorSMTP domainslinked to XYZCloud is essential for identifying other possible attack vectors.

This step aligns with the containment phase of the incident response lifecycle, as outlined in theCyberOps Technologies (CBRFIR) 300-215 study guide, where threat hunting and log analysis are used to determine the extent of compromise and prevent lateral movement or further exposure. Only after the scope is understood should remediation or reporting actions follow.

Steganography is the anti-forensics technique of hiding malicious content within seemingly innocent files, such as image, audio, or video files. The goal is to conceal data or code in a way that avoids suspicion and detection, thereby making traditional security inspection tools ineffective unless they are explicitly designed to detect hidden data within media files.

Steganography differs from encryption because it does not simply make data unreadable; it hides the existence of the data itself. It is commonly used in cyber operations to hide command-and-control instructions or to exfiltrate sensitive information in covert ways.

Theroot cause analysisin incident response focuses on identifying theinitial trigger or root causeof the incident to understand how it started and how to prevent recurrence. In this scenario, thephishing email sent to the victim(A) is the initial trigger that led to the employee’s action of clicking the malvertising link, resulting in the malware download.

The other options represent later stages in the incident response cycle, such as detection (SIEM alert, cybersecurity team’s alert) or supporting evidence (email header information), but they do not address the root cause, which is thephishing email itself.

This aligns with theCyberOps Technologies (CBRFIR) 300-215 study guide, which states that identifying theinitial vector of compromiseis critical to theroot cause analysisphase of incident response (Chapter: Incident Response Techniques, page 410-412).

The correct next step in analyzing the malicious nature of the email is toevaluate the artifactsinCisco Secure Malware Analytics(formerly Threat Grid). This tool provides a comprehensive sandbox environment where behavioral indicators like file execution, registry access, and domain connections are logged and scored.

The exhibit shows:

Remote PowerShell execution

Executable download from a flagged domain

SHA256 hash linked to malware

All these artifacts, as labeled in the Secure Malware Analytics output, arekey indicators of compromise, and analyzing them further can confirm whether the email was part of a malicious campaign.

Thus, the best action is:

A. Evaluate the artifacts in Cisco Secure Malware Analytics.

This STIX (Structured Threat Information eXpression) JSON snippet provides two key elements relevant for IOC (Indicator of Compromise) analysis:

The indicator pattern shows a suspicious URL:→ "pattern": "[url:value = 'http://x4z9rb.cn/4712/']" This is the actual IOC that can be used for detection.

The type of object that the indicator relates to:→ "type": "malware"→ "name": "x4z9arb backdoor"This indicates the nature of the threat associated with the IOC is malware.

Therefore, the threat is "malware" and the associated indicator (IOC) is the URL: http://x4z9rb.cn/4712/

Option A correctly captures both the IOC category ("malware") and the indicator value ("http://x4z9rb.cn/4712/").

To determine the correct script, we evaluate the following requirements:

The script must search for the IP address 192.168.100.100.

The output should be written to a file named parsed_host.log.

The matching lines should be printed to the console.

Analysis of the options:

Option A: Correct IP regex used and correct output filename, but reads from parsed_host.log instead of a source log file like test_log.log (not ideal for initial parsing).

Option C: The IP address used is 192.168.100.101 instead of 192.168.100.100 — incorrect.

Option D: Same IP address and logic as Option B, but uses print statement without parentheses, which is not valid in Python 3 unless using Python 2 — not ideal.

✅Option B:

Uses correct IP: "192.168.100.100"

Reads from test_log.log (presumably the source log file).

Writes to output/parsed_host.log.

Prints each matching line and writes to output file — satisfying all conditions.

The exhibit shows a PowerShell script that modifies registry keys under:

HKCU:\Software\Classes\Folder\shell\open\command

This technique is commonly associated with aUAC (User Account Control) bypass. Specifically:

It creates a new custom shell command path for opening folders.

The key registry property"DelegateExecute"is set, which is a known bypass method. If set without a value, it may cause Windows to run commands with elevated privileges without showing the UAC prompt.

The use ofHKCU(HKEY_CURRENT_USER) rather thanHKLM(HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE) allows the attacker to bypass permissions since HKCU is writable by the current user. This registry hijack can be leveraged by a malicious actor to execute arbitrary commands with elevated rights.

This is identified in the Cisco CyberOps study material under “UAC bypass techniques,” which describes:

“Attackers often create or modify registry keys like DelegateExecute to hijack the default behavior of applications and elevate privileges”.

Thus, option B is correct: the exhibit demonstrates a UAC bypass using user-accessible registry modification.

When dealing with suspected malicious activity involving obfuscated PowerShell scripts—especially when launched from Microsoft Word documents—behavioral analysis is the most critical next step. This approach helps in determining if the process chain is part of a known attack pattern, such as a phishing attempt using malicious macros that launch PowerShell for data exfiltration or payload download.

As highlighted in theCyberOps Technologies (CBRFIR) 300-215 study guide, understanding behavior and deobfuscating PowerShell scripts is an essential part of the forensic and incident response process. Specifically:

During the detection and analysis phase, if PowerShell is used with obfuscated or encoded commands, responders should investigate the intent and behavior of the command.

Deobfuscation allows analysts to see what the script is doing (e.g., downloading files, creating persistence mechanisms, or opening a reverse shell).

The guide states:

“For example, if the threat is malware, the compromised system should be immediately isolated and the malware should be placed in a sandbox or a detonation chamber to understand what it is trying to do”.

This confirms that understanding execution behavior (such as what the PowerShell script intends to perform) is key to uncovering indicators of compromise (IoCs).

Thus, option C—conducting a behavioral analysis and deobfuscating PowerShell—is the most critical and effective response at this stage.