300-220 Exam Dumps - Cisco Certified Specialist - Threat Hunting and Defending Questions and Answers

The correct answer isconverting hunt findings into permanent detection rules. This action reflects thehighest maturity outcomeof threat hunting.

Threat hunting is not complete until discoveries are:

Documented

Operationalized

Automated where appropriate

Without converting findings into detections, SOC teams repeatedly rediscover the same threats, wasting time and effort.

Options A and B increase noise and risk false positives. Option D improves experience but does not institutionalize knowledge.

Cisco’sCBRTHD blueprintemphasizes:

Continuous improvement

Detection engineering

Feedback loops between hunting and monitoring

By creating permanent detections, organizations:

Reduce dwell time

Improve consistency

Increase adversary cost

Therefore,Option Cis the correct and most Cisco-aligned answer.

The correct answer isit indicates disciplined and methodical tradecraft. Attribution relies on understandingattacker behavior patterns, not just tools or infrastructure.

Consistent operational discipline—such as cautious discovery, avoidance of noisy actions, and deliberate escalation—reflectshuman decision-making, which is difficult to change and often persists across campaigns.

Options A, B, and D focus on artifacts or infrastructure, which attackers frequently rotate. Behavioral patterns, however, form atradecraft fingerprint.

Cisco-aligned threat hunting usesMITRE ATT&CK technique mappingand behavioral consistency to support attribution, making this observation highly valuable.

Thus,Option Cis correct.

The correct answer isCollect and process intelligence and data. In this scenario, theinitial threat hunting phaseoccurred when the SOC team received the alert and began analyzing SIEM logs to validate whether the activity was legitimate or malicious. This aligns directly with the first phase of the threat hunting lifecycle, which focuses on gathering, normalizing, and analyzing security-relevant data.

Threat hunting is a structured, hypothesis-driven process, but it always begins withdata collection and intelligence processing. This includes ingesting logs from identity providers, authentication systems, cloud platforms, VPNs, and endpoint telemetry into a SIEM. In this case, the alert regarding a sign-in from an unusual country triggered analysts to examine historical login patterns and geolocation data. By confirming that the user had never authenticated from that country, the team established that the event was anomalous and likely malicious.

Option B (Response and resolution) occurredafterthe initial phase, when the IT administrator reset the user’s password to contain the threat. Option C (Hypothesis) would involve formulating a theory such as “the account may be compromised due to credential theft,” but this step requires validated data first. Option D (Post-incident review) only happens after the incident has been fully resolved and lessons learned are documented.

From a professional cybersecurity operations perspective, this phase is critical becausehigh-quality data determines hunt effectiveness. Poor log coverage or incomplete identity telemetry would prevent analysts from confidently confirming the anomaly. This example also highlights why identity-related telemetry is foundational to modern threat hunting—compromised credentials remain one of the most common initial access vectors.

In short, before a SOC can hypothesize, respond, or improve controls, it must firstcollect and process accurate intelligence and data, making option A the correct answer.

The correct answer isinternal systems authenticating to multiple hosts using SMB in a short time. This behavior is a classic indicator ofcredential-based lateral movement.

When attackers obtain valid credentials, they often move laterally by:

Accessing administrative shares (e.g., C$, ADMIN$)

Using SMB, WMI, WinRM, or RDP

Authenticating to multiple systems rapidly

Cisco Secure Network Analytics excels at identifyingeast-west traffic anomalies, which are central to lateral movement detection. A single host authenticating to many internal systems over SMB in a short time deviates strongly from normal user behavior.

Option A relates to external traffic, not lateral movement. Option C may indicate command-and-control or staging but not lateral movement. Option D aligns more with beaconing behavior.

This technique aligns withMITRE ATT&CK – Lateral Movementand is explicitly covered in theCBRTHD blueprintunder network-based threat hunting.

Thus,Option Bis the correct answer.

The correct answer isconsistent attacker tradecraft mapped to MITRE ATT&CK. Attribution at a professional level relies onbehavioral consistency, not superficial artifacts.

Advanced threat actors routinely rotate infrastructure, recompile malware, and vary filenames specifically to defeat attribution efforts. As a result, indicators such as IP addresses, hashes, and timestamps are unreliable and sit low on thePyramid of Pain.

What attackers cannot easily change ishow they operate. This includes:

Initial access techniques

Credential harvesting methods

Lateral movement patterns

Persistence mechanisms

Command-and-control behaviors

When these behaviors remain consistent across incidents, they form abehavioral fingerprint. Mapping these observations toMITRE ATT&CK techniquesallows analysts to compare activity against known threat group profiles maintained by intelligence providers and national CERTs.

Option A and B are weak indicators easily altered by attackers. Option D provides almost no attribution value, as timing alone is coincidental and unreliable.

Professional attribution requires correlating TTPs across campaigns and validating them against historical threat actor intelligence. This method supports high-confidence attribution used in legal, executive, and geopolitical contexts.

Therefore,Option Cis the correct and defensible answer.

The correct answer isendpoint memory access telemetry. Credential dumping often involves accessing sensitive memory regions, such as LSASS, rather than deploying obvious malware.

Modern attackers frequently use:

Legitimate tools

In-memory techniques

Living-off-the-land binaries

These methods bypass file-based detection entirely. Email, DNS, and firewall logs provide limited visibility into memory-level abuse.

Endpoint memory telemetry enables detection of:

Unauthorized LSASS access

Suspicious handle requests

Abnormal process injection

This telemetry is foundational for detectingcredential access techniquesin modern environments. Therefore, optionBis correct.

The correct answer isdocumenting findings and updating detection logic. This represents thepost-hunt operationalization phase, which is critical for long-term security improvement.

While options A and C are necessary response actions, they address only thecurrent incident. Threat hunting’s strategic value comes from transforming discoveries intorepeatable detections, playbooks, and controls.

Professional threat hunting programs ensure that:

Successful hunts produce new SIEM rules

Detection gaps are closed

Findings are documented for future analysts

Lessons learned inform security architecture decisions

Option D continues exploration but fails to institutionalize knowledge. Without operationalizing results, organizations repeatedly rediscover the same threats.

This phase directly increases maturity in theThreat Hunting Maturity Model, shifting organizations from hero-driven hunting to scalable, resilient detection. It also moves defendersup the Pyramid of Pain, forcing adversaries to change tactics rather than indicators.

Therefore, optionBis the correct and most strategically important answer.

The correct answer isit reveals operational discipline and intent. Attribution relies heavily on understandinghow attackers think and operate, not just the tools they use.

Operational discipline—such as careful reconnaissance, avoiding noisy exploitation, and operating during business hours—is ahuman behavioral pattern. These patterns are far more stable than infrastructure or malware and often correlate strongly with specific threat actor groups.

Option A and D focus on tooling, which changes frequently. Option B relates to persistence, not attribution.

Threat intelligence professionals use operational characteristics to distinguish between opportunistic criminals and advanced adversaries. Business-hour activity, careful lateral movement, and deliberate escalation often indicatetargeted intrusions, espionage, or financially motivated but sophisticated actors.

This information helps analysts align observed behavior with known threat actor profiles, improving attribution confidence. Thus, optionCis correct.

The correct answer ismonitoring NetFlow records for abnormal beaconing patterns. Cisco Secure Network Analytics is fundamentally abehavioral analytics platform, not a signature-based detection tool.

Advanced adversaries deliberately avoid known malicious infrastructure to bypass traditional IOC-based defenses. As a result, IP addresses, domains, and threat intelligence feeds (Options A and D) provide limited long-term value and sit at thelowest levels of the Pyramid of Pain.

Stealthwatch excels at detectingbehavioral anomalies in network traffic, particularly:

Regular, low-volume outbound connections

Consistent timing intervals (beaconing)

Rare destination communication

Protocol misuse over common ports (80/443)

These patterns are characteristic ofC2 traffic, even when encryption and legitimate cloud services are used. By analyzingNetFlow telemetry, analysts can detect C2 behavior without needing to know the destination in advance.

Firewall logs (Option C) are reactive and lack behavioral context. They also miss allowed traffic, which is where most stealthy C2 operates.

This hunting technique aligns directly withCBRTHD blueprint objectivesrelated to:

Network-based threat hunting

Detecting command-and-control communications

Moving detection higher on the Pyramid of Pain

Therefore,Option Bis the most effective and Cisco-aligned answer.

The correct answer isDiscovery of unknown attacker behaviors and closure of detection gaps. This outcome best reflects thestrategic valueof threat hunting beyond incident response.

Threat hunting is not primarily about cleanup actions such as credential resets or file removal—those areincident response tasks. The real value of hunting lies in uncoveringpreviously undetected attacker behaviors, understanding how adversaries bypass controls, and translating those findings intoimproved detection and prevention.

Option A represents low-value indicators that attackers can easily change. Option C assumes malware was involved, which is not the case. Option D is necessary but tactical, not strategic.

By identifying credential misuse patterns, lateral movement paths, and data exfiltration techniques, the team can:

Create new SIEM and EDR detections

Harden identity and access controls

Reduce dwell time for future intrusions

Force attackers higher up the Pyramid of Pain

This demonstratesorganizational resilience, not just containment. Mature security programs measure success by how effectively theyeliminate blind spots, not how many alerts they close.

Thus, optionBis the correct answer.