{"id":17519,"date":"2026-09-21T10:00:47","date_gmt":"2026-09-21T10:00:47","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.examlabs.com\/certification\/?p=17519"},"modified":"2026-09-21T10:00:47","modified_gmt":"2026-09-21T10:00:47","slug":"crowdstrike-ccfr-201-practice-test-questions-and-exam-dumps-part1-q1-20","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.examlabs.com\/certification\/crowdstrike-ccfr-201-practice-test-questions-and-exam-dumps-part1-q1-20\/","title":{"rendered":"CrowdStrike CCFR-201 Practice Test Questions and Exam Dumps Part1 Q1-20"},"content":{"rendered":"

View Full <\/b>CrowdStrike CCFR-201 Exam Dumps<\/b><\/a> and Practice Test Dumps<\/b><\/h2>\n

 <\/p>\n

Question 1.<\/b><\/p>\n

A security analyst reviewing a Falcon detection wants to understand the adversary’s objective and the behavior represented by the detection. Which framework should the analyst use for this context?<\/b><\/p>\n

    \n
  1. <\/b> CVSS<\/span>
    \n<\/span>2.<\/b> MITRE ATT&CK<\/span>
    \n<\/span>3.<\/b> OWASP Top 10<\/span>
    \n<\/span>4.<\/b> CIS Controls<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    Correct Answer: 2. MITRE ATT&CK<\/b><\/p>\n

    Explanation:<\/b><\/p>\n

    MITRE ATT&CK organizes adversary behavior into tactics and techniques and is used in Falcon to add context to detections. A tactic represents the adversary’s objective, while techniques describe how that objective may be accomplished. CrowdStrike includes understanding and applying MITRE ATT&CK tactics and techniques within Falcon as part of the CCFR exam objectives. CVSS is primarily used to score vulnerability severity, OWASP Top 10 focuses on common web application security risks, and CIS Controls provide broader defensive security practices rather than a behavioral model for adversary activity.<\/span><\/p>\n

    Question 2.<\/b><\/p>\n

    An analyst has hundreds of endpoint detections and wants to quickly focus on detections associated with a specific severity and host group. What is the most appropriate initial action?<\/b><\/p>\n

      \n
    1. <\/b> Start an RTR session with every affected endpoint<\/span>
      \n<\/span>2.<\/b> Create a sensor visibility exclusion<\/span>
      \n<\/span>3.<\/b> Use detection filtering, grouping, and sorting<\/span>
      \n<\/span>4.<\/b> Allowlist every associated hash<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

      Correct Answer: 3. Use detection filtering, grouping, and sorting<\/b><\/p>\n

      Explanation:<\/b><\/p>\n

      Filtering, grouping, and sorting help responders reduce a large detection set into a manageable collection relevant to the investigation. These functions are useful during initial triage because the analyst can focus on criteria such as severity, host, detection status, or other available attributes before conducting deeper analysis. Starting Real Time Response sessions immediately would be premature without understanding the detections. Creating exclusions or allowlisting hashes can reduce future visibility and should only be performed after appropriate analysis. Detection triage through filtering, grouping, and sorting is specifically included in the current CCFR objectives.<\/span><\/p>\n

      Question 3.<\/b><\/p>\n

      During an investigation, an analyst wants to determine which process launched a suspicious executable. Which relationship should the analyst examine first?<\/b><\/p>\n

        \n
      1. <\/b> Parent process relationship<\/span>
        \n<\/span>2.<\/b> Network neighbor relationship<\/span>
        \n<\/span>3.<\/b> User group relationship<\/span>
        \n<\/span>4.<\/b> Sensor policy relationship<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

        Correct Answer: 1. Parent process relationship<\/b><\/p>\n

        Explanation:<\/b><\/p>\n

        The parent process identifies the process responsible for launching or creating another process. Examining parent-child relationships is therefore fundamental when reconstructing suspicious execution activity. For example, if PowerShell starts from an unusual application, identifying its parent can help determine how the activity began. Falcon provides process-oriented investigation views that help analysts understand parent, child, and sibling process relationships. The CCFR objectives specifically require candidates to analyze these relationships using information available in detection details. Network neighbors, user groups, and sensor policies may provide useful context but do not directly identify what launched the suspicious executable.<\/span><\/p>\n

        Question 4.<\/b><\/p>\n

        A responder needs to examine activity occurring before and after a suspicious process executed on an endpoint. Which Falcon investigation capability is most appropriate?<\/b><\/p>\n

          \n
        1. <\/b> Bulk Domain Search<\/span>
          \n<\/span>2.<\/b> User Search<\/span>
          \n<\/span>3.<\/b> Host management policy<\/span>
          \n<\/span>4.<\/b> Process Timeline<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

          Correct Answer: 4. Process Timeline<\/b><\/p>\n

          Explanation:<\/b><\/p>\n

          A Process Timeline helps an analyst investigate events associated with a particular process and understand activity surrounding its execution. It is especially valuable when determining what occurred before or after suspicious behavior, including related process and event activity. The CCFR exam objectives require responders to understand the information provided by Process Timeline and when to pivot to process-focused investigation tools from event searches. Bulk Domain Search focuses on domains, while User Search focuses on identity-related information. Host management policies control endpoint configuration and do not provide the detailed sequence of process activity required for this investigation.<\/span><\/p>\n

          Question 5.<\/b><\/p>\n

          An analyst finds a suspicious SHA-256 value during a detection investigation and wants to determine where else it has appeared in the environment. Which search tool is most appropriate?<\/b><\/p>\n

            \n
          1. <\/b> User Search<\/span>
            \n<\/span>2.<\/b> Hash Search<\/span>
            \n<\/span>3.<\/b> IP Search<\/span>
            \n<\/span>4.<\/b> Bulk Domain Search<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

            Correct Answer: 2. Hash Search<\/b><\/p>\n

            Explanation:<\/b><\/p>\n

            Hash Search is designed to investigate file hashes and determine their presence or prevalence across the environment. When a responder discovers a suspicious SHA-256, SHA-1, or another supported hash value, searching for it can reveal additional hosts or activity associated with the same file. This helps determine whether the detection represents an isolated event or broader exposure. User Search is centered on user-related activity, IP Search investigates network indicators, and Bulk Domain Search focuses on domain names. The ability to analyze information returned through Hash Search is specifically identified within the CCFR Search Tools objectives.<\/span><\/p>\n

            Question 6.<\/b><\/p>\n

            A detection contains a suspicious external IP address. The analyst wants additional information specifically related to that IP across Falcon data. What should the analyst use?<\/b><\/p>\n

              \n
            1. <\/b> IP Search<\/span>
              \n<\/span>2.<\/b> Hash Search<\/span>
              \n<\/span>3.<\/b> Host Search<\/span>
              \n<\/span>4.<\/b> User Search<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

              Correct Answer: 1. IP Search<\/b><\/p>\n

              Explanation:<\/b><\/p>\n

              IP Search is the appropriate Falcon search capability when an analyst needs to investigate an IP address and determine its associated activity or context. Searching the indicator can help identify endpoints or events related to the address and support decisions about whether the communication is suspicious. The current CCFR objectives explicitly include analyzing information provided by an IP Search. Hash Search is intended for file hashes, Host Search provides information about endpoints, and User Search focuses on users. Selecting the search tool that corresponds directly to the indicator type makes the investigation more focused and efficient.<\/span><\/p>\n

              Question 7.<\/b><\/p>\n

              An analyst wants to understand activity associated with a specific employee account during an investigation. Which Falcon feature should be used?<\/b><\/p>\n

                \n
              1. <\/b> Bulk Domain Search<\/span>
                \n<\/span>2.<\/b> Process Explorer<\/span>
                \n<\/span>3.<\/b> User Search<\/span>
                \n<\/span>4.<\/b> Hash Search<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                Correct Answer: 3. User Search<\/b><\/p>\n

                Explanation:<\/b><\/p>\n

                User Search is intended to provide information related to a specific user and can help responders investigate activity associated with an account. During incident response, an analyst may need to determine where a user has been observed or obtain contextual information that helps connect identity activity to endpoint events. The CCFR exam scope explicitly includes analyzing information provided by User Search. Bulk Domain Search investigates domain indicators, Process Explorer focuses on process activity, and Hash Search is designed for file hashes. Using the appropriate search tool helps analysts pivot efficiently between users, endpoints, indicators, and processes during an investigation.<\/span><\/p>\n

                Question 8.<\/b><\/p>\n

                A responder must directly connect to a compromised endpoint to investigate files and execute approved remediation commands. Which Falcon capability should be used?<\/b><\/p>\n

                  \n
                1. <\/b> Endpoint Detection filtering<\/span>
                  \n<\/span>2.<\/b> Host Timeline<\/span>
                  \n<\/span>3.<\/b> Bulk Domain Search<\/span>
                  \n<\/span>4.<\/b> Real Time Response<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                  Correct Answer: 4. Real Time Response<\/b><\/p>\n

                  Explanation:<\/b><\/p>\n

                  Falcon Real Time Response, commonly called RTR, enables authorized responders to establish a remote session with an endpoint and perform investigation or remediation tasks. Depending on assigned permissions and configured settings, responders can use RTR commands and approved scripts to investigate suspicious artifacts and remediate threats. The current CCFR objectives include understanding RTR capabilities, administrative requirements, connecting to hosts, using commands and custom scripts, and auditing RTR activity. Detection filtering and timelines support analysis but do not provide the same direct response channel to an endpoint. Bulk Domain Search is an indicator-search capability rather than an endpoint remediation tool.<\/span><\/p>\n

                  Question 9.<\/b><\/p>\n

                  An analyst wants to determine whether a suspicious file is common throughout the enterprise or has been observed only rarely. Which concept is most relevant?<\/b><\/p>\n

                    \n
                  1. <\/b> Internal prevalence<\/span>
                    \n<\/span>2.<\/b> Sensor version<\/span>
                    \n<\/span>3.<\/b> Host containment policy<\/span>
                    \n<\/span>4.<\/b> User role assignment<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                    Correct Answer: 1. Internal prevalence<\/b><\/p>\n

                    Explanation:<\/b><\/p>\n

                    Internal prevalence describes how frequently an item such as a file or indicator appears within the organization’s own environment. A file that is widespread across legitimate systems may require different interpretation from one observed on only a single endpoint. Analysts should combine prevalence with other detection evidence rather than treating prevalence alone as proof of legitimacy or maliciousness. CrowdStrike’s current CCFR objectives specifically include evaluating the impact of internal and external prevalence during detection analysis. Sensor versions, containment policies, and user roles may matter operationally, but they do not directly answer how common the suspicious file is across the enterprise.<\/span><\/p>\n

                    Question 10.<\/b><\/p>\n

                    An analyst is investigating several suspicious domain names from threat intelligence. Which Falcon search capability is designed to examine multiple domains efficiently?<\/b><\/p>\n

                      \n
                    1. <\/b> Host Search<\/span>
                      \n<\/span>2.<\/b> Bulk Domain Search<\/span>
                      \n<\/span>3.<\/b> User Search<\/span>
                      \n<\/span>4.<\/b> Process Timeline<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                      Correct Answer: 2. Bulk Domain Search<\/b><\/p>\n

                      Explanation:<\/b><\/p>\n

                      Bulk Domain Search is suited to investigations involving multiple domain indicators. Rather than investigating domains individually through unrelated workflows, the analyst can use the domain-focused search capability to examine relevant enterprise information more efficiently. This can be useful when threat intelligence provides a list of potentially malicious command-and-control or phishing domains. The current CCFR Search Tools objectives specifically include analyzing information provided through Bulk Domain Search. Host Search focuses on endpoint information, User Search focuses on accounts, and Process Timeline examines process-related activity. Selecting the search capability that matches the indicator type improves investigation speed and consistency.<\/span><\/p>\n

                      Question 11.<\/b><\/p>\n

                      A responder uses an RTR custom script during remediation. Later, the security manager wants to verify who initiated the RTR activity and review what was performed. What should be examined?<\/b><\/p>\n

                        \n
                      1. <\/b> MITRE ATT&CK matrix<\/span>
                        \n<\/span>2.<\/b> External prevalence<\/span>
                        \n<\/span>3.<\/b> Detection grouping settings<\/span>
                        \n<\/span>4.<\/b> RTR audit logs<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                        Correct Answer: 4. RTR audit logs<\/b><\/p>\n

                        Explanation:<\/b><\/p>\n

                        RTR audit logs provide accountability for Real Time Response activity and are the appropriate resource for reviewing actions performed through RTR. Audit information is important because direct endpoint response capabilities can make significant changes to systems. Security teams should be able to determine who performed response actions and review relevant activity for governance, troubleshooting, and incident documentation. Reviewing RTR audit logs is explicitly included among the CCFR Real Time Response objectives. The MITRE ATT&CK matrix explains adversary behavior, prevalence measures how common indicators are, and detection grouping settings organize detections; none provide the required record of RTR activity.<\/span><\/p>\n

                        Question 12.<\/b><\/p>\n

                        While reviewing a Falcon detection, an analyst wants a visual representation of process ancestry and descendants. Which view is most appropriate?<\/b><\/p>\n

                          \n
                        1. <\/b> Host Search<\/span>
                          \n<\/span>2.<\/b> User Search<\/span>
                          \n<\/span>3.<\/b> View As Process Tree<\/span>
                          \n<\/span>4.<\/b> IP Search<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                          Correct Answer: 3. View As Process Tree<\/b><\/p>\n

                          Explanation:<\/b><\/p>\n

                          View As Process Tree is designed to show process relationships in a hierarchical format, making it easier to understand how processes are connected. An analyst can use it to examine parents, children, and related process activity when reconstructing an attack chain. This view is particularly valuable when a malicious process was launched by another executable or spawned additional suspicious processes. The CCFR Detection Analysis objectives require candidates to interpret information shown in Process Tree, Process Table, and Process Activity views. Host, User, and IP searches can provide useful investigation context, but they are not primarily designed to visualize process ancestry and descendants.<\/span><\/p>\n

                          Question 13.<\/b><\/p>\n

                          A Falcon responder wants to investigate information about a particular endpoint, including details relevant to its presence and relationships in the environment. Which tool should be used?<\/b><\/p>\n

                            \n
                          1. <\/b> Host Search<\/span>
                            \n<\/span>2.<\/b> Bulk Domain Search<\/span>
                            \n<\/span>3.<\/b> Hash Search<\/span>
                            \n<\/span>4.<\/b> User Search<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                            Correct Answer: 1. Host Search<\/b><\/p>\n

                            Explanation:<\/b><\/p>\n

                            Host Search provides endpoint-focused information and is the appropriate starting point when an investigation centers on a particular device. Falcon responders can use host-related information to better understand an endpoint and pivot into other investigative workflows. The CCFR objectives include analyzing Host Search results and identifying managed or unmanaged neighbors for an endpoint during Host Search. Bulk Domain Search investigates domain indicators, Hash Search focuses on file hashes, and User Search focuses on account-related information. Choosing Host Search keeps the investigation centered on the endpoint before the analyst pivots to processes, timelines, users, or indicators as additional evidence becomes available.<\/span><\/p>\n

                            Question 14.<\/b><\/p>\n

                            A responder has verified that a file hash is malicious and wants Falcon to prevent the associated file from executing where the applicable hash-management controls are enforced. Which action is most appropriate?<\/b><\/p>\n

                              \n
                            1. <\/b> Allow<\/span>
                              \n<\/span>2.<\/b> No action<\/span>
                              \n<\/span>3.<\/b> Detect Only<\/span>
                              \n<\/span>4.<\/b> Block<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                              Correct Answer: 4. Block<\/b><\/p>\n

                              Explanation:<\/b><\/p>\n

                              A Block action is appropriate when an organization has determined that a file represented by a hash is malicious and wants Falcon’s applicable hash-management controls to prevent execution. CrowdStrike’s CCFR objectives specifically require responders to distinguish among hash-management actions such as Block, Block and Hide Detection, Detect Only, Allow, and No action. These options should be selected carefully because they produce different security and visibility outcomes. Allow is intended for trusted items, while Detect Only maintains detection without the same blocking behavior. No action does not provide the required prevention response for a confirmed malicious hash.<\/span><\/p>\n

                              Question 15.<\/b><\/p>\n

                              A responder needs Falcon to continue detecting activity associated with a hash but does not want the hash-management action itself to block execution. Which option best fits this requirement?<\/b><\/p>\n

                                \n
                              1. <\/b> Allow<\/span>
                                \n<\/span>2.<\/b> Detect Only<\/span>
                                \n<\/span>3.<\/b> Block and Hide Detection<\/span>
                                \n<\/span>4.<\/b> Block<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                Correct Answer: 2. Detect Only<\/b><\/p>\n

                                Explanation:<\/b><\/p>\n

                                Detect Only is appropriate when the objective is to preserve detection visibility without applying the blocking behavior associated with a Block action. This may be useful during analysis or when an organization wants visibility before implementing stronger prevention. The responder should understand the operational impact before selecting any hash-management action. The CCFR objectives explicitly expect candidates to distinguish among Block, Block and Hide Detection, Detect Only, Allow, and No action. Allow is used for trusted content, while Block prevents execution under applicable controls. Block and Hide Detection combines blocking with different detection-visibility behavior and therefore does not meet the stated requirement.<\/span><\/p>\n

                                Question 16.<\/b><\/p>\n

                                A responder discovers that legitimate software is triggering detections and considers creating an exclusion. What is the most important consideration before applying the exclusion?<\/b><\/p>\n

                                  \n
                                1. <\/b> Every exclusion automatically quarantines the software<\/span>
                                  \n<\/span>2.<\/b> Exclusions increase the severity of existing detections<\/span>
                                  \n<\/span>3.<\/b> Different exclusion types can reduce different forms of prevention or visibility<\/span>
                                  \n<\/span>4.<\/b> Exclusions apply only to inactive hosts<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                  Correct Answer: 3. Different exclusion types can reduce different forms of prevention or visibility<\/b><\/p>\n

                                  Explanation:<\/b><\/p>\n

                                  Exclusions should be created cautiously because different exclusion mechanisms can affect security controls in different ways. The CCFR objectives specifically require responders to understand the effects of machine-learning exclusions, sensor visibility exclusions, and IOA exclusions. An overly broad exclusion can reduce the telemetry, detection, or prevention information available to defenders, potentially creating blind spots. Therefore, the analyst should understand the exact exclusion type, scope, and security effect before implementation. Exclusions do not inherently quarantine files, do not simply raise detection severity, and are not limited to inactive hosts. Proper investigation and narrow scoping help preserve security visibility while addressing legitimate software behavior.<\/span><\/p>\n

                                  Question 17.<\/b><\/p>\n

                                  An analyst starts from a Falcon detection and wants to search enterprise events related to the suspicious activity, then narrow the results using available event actions. What should the analyst perform?<\/b><\/p>\n

                                    \n
                                  1. <\/b> Event Advanced Search<\/span>
                                    \n<\/span>2.<\/b> User Search only<\/span>
                                    \n<\/span>3.<\/b> Sensor policy assignment<\/span>
                                    \n<\/span>4.<\/b> Hash allowlisting<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                    Correct Answer: 1. Event Advanced Search<\/b><\/p>\n

                                    Explanation:<\/b><\/p>\n

                                    Event Advanced Search allows a responder to pivot from a detection into enterprise event data and investigate related activity in greater depth. The analyst can refine the investigation based on event information and use relevant event actions to continue pivoting through the data. CrowdStrike specifically lists performing an Event Advanced Search from a detection, refining searches with event actions, and distinguishing common event types among the current CCFR objectives. User Search may be useful for a later identity-focused pivot, but it does not replace an event search. Changing sensor policies or allowlisting a hash would modify controls rather than investigate the event evidence.<\/span><\/p>\n

                                    Question 18.<\/b><\/p>\n

                                    An analyst investigating a detection wants to understand activity across an endpoint over time rather than concentrating on one specific process. Which capability is most appropriate?<\/b><\/p>\n

                                      \n
                                    1. <\/b> Hash Search<\/span>
                                      \n<\/span>2.<\/b> Host Timeline<\/span>
                                      \n<\/span>3.<\/b> Bulk Domain Search<\/span>
                                      \n<\/span>4.<\/b> User Search<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                      Correct Answer: 2. Host Timeline<\/b><\/p>\n

                                      Explanation:<\/b><\/p>\n

                                      A Host Timeline provides a broader chronological view of endpoint activity and is useful when an analyst wants to investigate what occurred on a particular host across a period of time. This differs from a Process Timeline, which centers investigation more specifically around a process. CrowdStrike’s CCFR Event Investigation objectives expect candidates to understand what information Host Timeline and Process Timeline provide and when process-focused pivots are appropriate. Hash Search, Bulk Domain Search, and User Search are specialized search tools for particular indicators or identities and do not provide the same host-centered chronological investigation capability.<\/span><\/p>\n

                                      Question 19.<\/b><\/p>\n

                                      A responder has quarantined a suspicious file. Which approach represents the best investigation practice before permanently removing or restoring it?<\/b><\/p>\n

                                        \n
                                      1. <\/b> Evaluate the file’s context, legitimacy, and investigation evidence<\/span>
                                        \n<\/span>2.<\/b> Automatically restore every quarantined file after 24 hours<\/span>
                                        \n<\/span>3.<\/b> Disable all detections generated by the host<\/span>
                                        \n<\/span>4.<\/b> Permanently delete every quarantined file immediately<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                        Correct Answer: 1. Evaluate the file’s context, legitimacy, and investigation evidence<\/b><\/p>\n

                                        Explanation:<\/b><\/p>\n

                                        Quarantine is a containment mechanism, but responders should still evaluate the file and surrounding evidence before taking a final action. Relevant context may include detection information, process relationships, prevalence, threat intelligence, hash information, and the legitimate purpose of the file. Automatically restoring everything could reintroduce malicious content, while automatically deleting everything could remove legitimate business files. Disabling detections would also reduce useful security visibility. The current CCFR objectives specifically include applying best practices to quarantined files, making careful analysis and evidence-based handling an important skill for Falcon responders.<\/span><\/p>\n

                                        Question 20.<\/b><\/p>\n

                                        A security team repeatedly performs the same remediation procedure through RTR. The procedure requires several approved commands and should be reusable by authorized responders. What is the most suitable approach?<\/b><\/p>\n

                                          \n
                                        1. <\/b> Create a sensor visibility exclusion<\/span>
                                          \n<\/span>2.<\/b> Add the malicious file to an allowlist<\/span>
                                          \n<\/span>3.<\/b> Use an RTR custom script<\/span>
                                          \n<\/span>4.<\/b> Replace the endpoint’s detection history<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                          Correct Answer: 3. Use an RTR custom script<\/b><\/p>\n

                                          Explanation:<\/b><\/p>\n

                                          An RTR custom script can package repeatable response actions into a controlled procedure that authorized responders can execute through Real Time Response. This can improve consistency and reduce manual effort during recurring remediation tasks. CrowdStrike’s current CCFR objectives explicitly include using custom scripts in RTR to remediate threats and setting up workflows with RTR custom scripts. Scripts should still be governed by appropriate permissions, testing, and auditing. A sensor visibility exclusion would reduce telemetry, an allowlist would trust a file rather than remediate a threat, and altering detection history would not carry out the required endpoint remediation procedure.<\/span><\/p>\n

                                           <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

                                          View Full CrowdStrike CCFR-201 Exam Dumps and Practice Test Dumps   Question 1. A security analyst reviewing a Falcon detection wants to understand the adversary’s objective and the behavior represented by the detection. Which framework should the analyst use for this context? CVSS 2. MITRE ATT&CK 3. OWASP Top 10 4. CIS Controls Correct Answer: […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[1648,1647],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.examlabs.com\/certification\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/17519"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.examlabs.com\/certification\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.examlabs.com\/certification\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.examlabs.com\/certification\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.examlabs.com\/certification\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=17519"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.examlabs.com\/certification\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/17519\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":17520,"href":"https:\/\/www.examlabs.com\/certification\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/17519\/revisions\/17520"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.examlabs.com\/certification\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=17519"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.examlabs.com\/certification\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=17519"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.examlabs.com\/certification\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=17519"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}