CertsPoint
See all results for ""
Exams About Us
Sign In Get Started

Conducting Threat Hunting and Defending using Cisco Technologies for CyberOps 300-220 Exam Questions

Preparing for the 300-220 exam is simple with CertsPoint. We offer easy-to-understand study materials that help you learn the most important exam topics. You can study using our PDF questions, practice online with a real exam-style test, or use the desktop practice software. Choose the study method that works best for you and prepare at your own pace.

At CertsPoint, we keep our 300-220 practice questions up to date. Whenever the exam syllabus or objectives change, we update our study materials so you always learn the latest topics. This helps you save time, avoid outdated content, and feel more confident when you take your exam.

Download Exam View Entire Exam
Page: 2 / 3
Question #6 (Topic: Demo Questions)

A SOC team wants to detect lateral movement performed using legitimate administrative tools rather than malware. Which telemetry source provides the MOST reliable visibility for this hunting objective?

A.

Antivirus detection logs

B.
Email security gateway logs
C.
Authentication and remote execution logs
D.

Web proxy URL filtering logs

Correct Answer: C
Explanation:

The correct answer is authentication and remote execution logs . Lateral movement using legitimate tools relies heavily on credential use and remote management protocols , not malware execution.

Attackers commonly use:

RDP

SMB administrative shares

WinRM

WMI

SSH

These techniques generate authentication events, remote logons, and service execution logs rather than malware alerts. Antivirus tools are ineffective here because no malicious binaries are involved.

Option A is ineffective against living-off-the-land attacks. Option B is unrelated to lateral movement. Option D may show some activity but lacks the necessary depth to identify privilege misuse or session hopping.

Authentication telemetry enables hunters to detect anomalies such as:

Logons between non-associated systems

Sudden administrative access

Credential reuse across hosts

Abnormal session timing and frequency

This data is foundational for credential-based attack detection , which remains one of the most common breach paths today. It also aligns with MITRE ATT & CK Lateral Movement and Credential Access tactics .

Thus, option C is the correct answer.

Question #7 (Topic: Demo Questions)

A security architect is designing a threat model for a multi-tier cloud application that includes public APIs, backend microservices, and an identity provider. The goal is to identify how an attacker could chain multiple weaknesses together to achieve account takeover and data exfiltration. Which threat modeling technique is MOST appropriate?

A.

STRIDE analysis to enumerate threat categories per component


B.

CVSS scoring to prioritize vulnerabilities by severity


C.

Attack trees to model adversary objectives and paths


D.

DREAD scoring to assess impact and exploitability

Correct Answer: C
Explanation:

The correct answer is Attack trees . Attack trees are uniquely suited for modeling multi-step adversary behavior , which is essential when analyzing complex attack chains such as account takeover followed by data exfiltration.

Attack trees begin with a high-level attacker goal (for example, “Exfiltrate customer data”) and then break that goal into multiple branches representing different paths an attacker could take. These paths can include credential compromise, API abuse, privilege escalation, lateral movement, and persistence. This structure mirrors how real adversaries think and operate.

Option A (STRIDE) is useful for identifying broad threat categories—such as spoofing, tampering, or information disclosure—but it does not naturally capture sequential attack paths . Option B (CVSS) focuses on vulnerability severity scoring, not adversary behavior. Option D (DREAD) assesses risk impact but does not visualize how attacks unfold across systems.

For threat hunters and defenders, attack trees provide a shared mental model between architects, SOC teams, and red teams. They directly inform detection engineering by highlighting critical choke points where attacker behavior must occur, such as token abuse, API enumeration, or anomalous role assumption in cloud environments.

In modern cloud security, where breaches often involve multiple low-severity issues chained together , attack trees offer far greater strategic value than component-by-component analysis. They also align closely with MITRE ATT & CK mapping , enabling defenders to translate threat models into actionable hunts.

Thus, option C is the most appropriate and professionally validated answer.

Question #8 (Topic: Demo Questions)

A SOC analyst using Cisco security tools wants to differentiate threat hunting from traditional detection engineering . Which activity BEST represents threat hunting rather than detection engineering?

A.

Creating a SIEM rule to alert on known malicious domains


B.

Tuning EDR alerts to reduce false positives


C.

Formulating a hypothesis to search for credential misuse without alerts


D.

Blocking IP addresses based on Talos intelligence

Correct Answer: C
Explanation:

The correct answer is formulating a hypothesis to search for credential misuse without alerts . This activity is the defining characteristic of threat hunting .

Threat hunting is proactive and hypothesis-driven , meaning analysts intentionally search for attacker behavior that has not yet triggered alerts. Detection engineering, on the other hand, focuses on building and tuning automated rules that respond to known patterns.

Options A, B, and D all represent reactive or preventative security operations . They rely on known indicators or alerts and are foundational but insufficient against stealthy adversaries who abuse valid credentials and native tools.

Cisco’s CBRTHD blueprint explicitly emphasizes hypothesis-based hunting as a core competency. Hunters ask questions like:

    “If credentials were stolen, how would that look in our telemetry?”

    “What behavior would indicate lateral movement without malware?”

This approach aligns with detecting Indicators of Attack (IOAs) and operating higher on the Pyramid of Pain , forcing adversaries to change tactics instead of infrastructure.

Therefore, Option C is the correct and Cisco-aligned answer.

Question #9 (Topic: Demo Questions)

A threat hunting team wants to ensure hunts are repeatable, scalable, and less dependent on individual analyst intuition. What is the MOST important process improvement?

A.

Increasing the number of threat intelligence feeds


B.

Automating alert triage workflows


C.

Standardizing hunt documentation and hypotheses


D.

Blocking all suspicious activity automatically

Correct Answer: C
Explanation:

The correct answer is standardizing hunt documentation and hypotheses . Mature threat hunting programs move beyond ad-hoc, intuition-driven efforts.

Standardization enables:

    Knowledge sharing

    Consistent methodology

    Repeatable hunts

    Easier onboarding of new analysts

Option A and B support operations but do not improve hunting maturity. Option D is unrealistic and risky.

By documenting hypotheses, data sources, queries, findings, and outcomes, organizations institutionalize knowledge and continuously improve detection capabilities.

This is a defining characteristic of high-maturity threat hunting programs .

Therefore, option C is correct.

Question #10 (Topic: Demo Questions)

A security team wants to create a plan to protect companies from lateral movement attacks. The team already implemented detection alerts for pass-the-hash and pass-the-ticket techniques. Which two components must be monitored to hunt for lateral movement attacks on endpoints? (Choose two.)

A.

Use of the runas command


B.

Linux file systems for files that have the setuid/setgid bit set


C.

Use of Windows Remote Management


D.

Creation of scheduled task events


E.

Use of tools and commands to connect to remote shares

Next Question
Correct Answer: C, E
Explanation:

The correct answers are Use of Windows Remote Management (C) and Use of tools and commands to connect to remote shares (E) . Both are core mechanisms attackers leverage for lateral movement after gaining valid credentials through techniques such as pass-the-hash or pass-the-ticket.

Windows Remote Management (WinRM) is a legitimate administrative service used for remote command execution and system management. However, attackers frequently abuse WinRM to move laterally by executing commands on remote endpoints using stolen credentials. From a threat hunting perspective, abnormal WinRM usage—such as execution outside normal administrative hours, from unusual source hosts, or by non-administrative user accounts—is a strong indicator of lateral movement activity.

Similarly, the use of tools and commands to connect to remote shares (such as net use, wmic, SMB-based access, or mounting administrative shares like C$) is a classic lateral movement technique. Attackers use remote shares to transfer tools, stage payloads, and execute malware across systems. Monitoring these activities at the endpoint level helps identify suspicious authentication attempts, unexpected share access, and abnormal file transfers.

Option A (runas) relates more to privilege escalation than lateral movement. Option B is specific to Linux privilege persistence and is not relevant to endpoint lateral movement hunting in this context. Option D (scheduled task creation) is primarily associated with persistence rather than movement between systems.

By monitoring WinRM activity and remote share usage, security teams gain visibility into credential-based movement , which remains one of the most common and dangerous attacker behaviors in enterprise environments. Effective lateral movement hunting focuses on how credentials are used , not just how they are stolen.