{"id":19786,"date":"2026-09-23T07:35:27","date_gmt":"2026-09-23T07:35:27","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.examlabs.com\/certification\/?p=19786"},"modified":"2026-09-23T07:35:27","modified_gmt":"2026-09-23T07:35:27","slug":"cyberark-epm-def-practice-test-questions-and-exam-dumps-part16-q301-320","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.examlabs.com\/certification\/cyberark-epm-def-practice-test-questions-and-exam-dumps-part16-q301-320\/","title":{"rendered":"CyberArk EPM-DEF Practice Test Questions and Exam Dumps Part16 Q301-320"},"content":{"rendered":"

View Full <\/b>CyberArk EPM-DEF Exam Dumps<\/b><\/a> and Practice Test Dumps<\/b><\/h2>\n

 <\/p>\n

Question 301.<\/b><\/p>\n

An EPM administrator wants to prevent a trusted elevated application from being replaced by a user-controlled executable. Which control is MOST important?<\/b><\/p>\n

    \n
  1. <\/b> Protect the application’s installation directory with restrictive file permissions<\/span><\/li>\n
  2. <\/b> Increase endpoint storage<\/span><\/li>\n
  3. <\/b> Change the application icon<\/span><\/li>\n
  4. <\/b> Add a desktop shortcut<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    Correct Answer: 1. Protect the application’s installation directory with restrictive file permissions<\/b><\/p>\n

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

    A trusted elevation policy can become dangerous if standard users are able to modify or replace the executable that receives privilege. Restricting write permissions on the installation directory helps preserve the integrity of trusted application files. This control should be combined with strong application-identification attributes such as a hash, verified publisher, product name, or digital signature. Administrators should also examine supporting components such as DLLs, configuration files, and helper executables because those can influence privileged behavior. Increasing storage or changing visual properties does not protect application integrity. Secure EPM deployment therefore relies on both precise policy matching and operating-system controls that prevent unprivileged users from modifying trusted software.<\/span><\/p>\n

    Question 302.<\/b><\/p>\n

    A trusted application is updated every month, causing its hash to change. Which identification strategy is MOST appropriate for reducing policy maintenance?<\/b><\/p>\n

      \n
    1. <\/b> Use filename only<\/span><\/li>\n
    2. <\/b> Use trusted publisher information combined with product-specific criteria<\/span><\/li>\n
    3. <\/b> Give users administrator rights<\/span><\/li>\n
    4. <\/b> Trust all signed executables<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

      Correct Answer: 2. Use trusted publisher information combined with product-specific criteria<\/b><\/p>\n

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

      Hash-based matching provides precise identification but requires policy updates whenever the binary changes. For frequently updated applications, trusted publisher information can provide more durable identification because the vendor typically signs each approved version. Publisher trust should still be combined with product name, executable name, version criteria, protected path, or similar attributes to avoid elevating unrelated applications from the same vendor. Filename-only rules are easy to imitate, while trusting every signed application is overly broad. Permanent administrator rights would eliminate application-level control entirely. The best EPM policy balances secure application identity with practical maintenance across normal software updates.<\/span><\/p>\n

      Question 303.<\/b><\/p>\n

      An EPM administrator wants to confirm whether a newly deployed application-control rule is being enforced on remote endpoints. Which information should be checked FIRST?<\/b><\/p>\n

        \n
      1. <\/b> Printer inventory<\/span><\/li>\n
      2. <\/b> Desktop wallpaper status<\/span><\/li>\n
      3. <\/b> Agent check-in, synchronization status, and current policy version<\/span><\/li>\n
      4. <\/b> Browser favorites<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

        Correct Answer: 3. Agent check-in, synchronization status, and current policy version<\/b><\/p>\n

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

        A centrally configured policy is effective only after the endpoint receives and applies it. Administrators should verify whether the EPM agent has recently checked in, whether synchronization completed successfully, and whether the expected policy version is present on the endpoint. Remote systems may be offline, have communication problems, or remain on cached older policy. Connectivity, certificates, agent health, and target membership may also need review. Unrelated endpoint settings such as printers or browser preferences do not confirm policy enforcement. Policy distribution and agent communication are fundamental operational checks after deploying new or emergency EPM rules.<\/span><\/p>\n

        Question 304.<\/b><\/p>\n

        An elevated utility can launch arbitrary executables selected by the user. Why is this potentially dangerous?<\/b><\/p>\n

          \n
        1. <\/b> The endpoint may run out of disk space<\/span><\/li>\n
        2. <\/b> The user may change printer settings<\/span><\/li>\n
        3. <\/b> The application may lose its signature<\/span><\/li>\n
        4. <\/b> User-selected child processes may inherit elevated privilege**<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

          Correct Answer: 4. User-selected child processes may inherit elevated privilege<\/b><\/p>\n

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

          If an elevated application allows users to select and launch arbitrary child executables, it can become a general-purpose privilege-escalation mechanism. The administrator should determine whether child processes inherit administrative rights and whether users can control their location, arguments, or content. If so, an attacker or ordinary user could potentially run unapproved software with elevated privileges. Policies may need to restrict child-process behavior, limit command-line parameters, or use another workflow that grants privilege only to known components. Secure EPM policy design must consider the complete process tree rather than only the initial application that received elevation.<\/span><\/p>\n

          Question 305.<\/b><\/p>\n

          Which application-identification method is BEST for blocking one exact known malicious executable even if the user renames it?<\/b><\/p>\n

            \n
          1. <\/b> Cryptographic hash<\/span><\/li>\n
          2. <\/b> Filename<\/span><\/li>\n
          3. <\/b> File extension<\/span><\/li>\n
          4. <\/b> Shortcut name<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

            Correct Answer: 1. Cryptographic hash<\/b><\/p>\n

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

            A cryptographic hash is based on the file contents rather than its visible name. Renaming the executable typically does not alter the hash, so the malicious binary can still be recognized and blocked. This makes hash-based rules effective for known files where exact identification is required. The limitation is that modified variants will generate different hashes and may require additional rules or broader identifying characteristics. Filename and extension controls are much easier to bypass because users can change them without altering the underlying binary. Hash-based blocking is therefore a strong choice for a specific known threat.<\/span><\/p>\n

            Question 306.<\/b><\/p>\n

            A company wants elevation for a trusted utility only on engineering endpoints. What should the administrator configure?<\/b><\/p>\n

              \n
            1. <\/b> A global policy<\/span><\/li>\n
            2. <\/b> Application identification plus engineering-specific endpoint targeting<\/span><\/li>\n
            3. <\/b> Permanent local administrator rights for all users<\/span><\/li>\n
            4. <\/b> Disabled policy scoping<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

              Correct Answer: 2. Application identification plus engineering-specific endpoint targeting<\/b><\/p>\n

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

              A secure EPM policy should define both the trusted application and the systems where elevation is authorized. Application identification prevents unrelated software from matching the rule, while endpoint targeting ensures the privilege is available only on engineering devices that require it. This reduces the attack surface and prevents the same trusted software from becoming a privilege pathway elsewhere. Administrators should also verify group membership periodically so reassigned endpoints do not retain obsolete privileges. A global rule or permanent administrator rights would expose far more systems than necessary and conflict with least privilege.<\/span><\/p>\n

              Question 307.<\/b><\/p>\n

              A user requests elevation for an unrecognized application downloaded from an external website. What should happen FIRST?<\/b><\/p>\n

                \n
              1. <\/b> Automatically elevate the application<\/span><\/li>\n
              2. <\/b> Give the user administrator rights<\/span><\/li>\n
              3. <\/b> Validate the application’s source, business requirement, identity, and security risk<\/span><\/li>\n
              4. <\/b> Disable EPM on the endpoint<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                Correct Answer: 3. Validate the application’s source, business requirement, identity, and security risk<\/b><\/p>\n

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

                User requests do not automatically establish trust. Before granting elevation, administrators should determine whether the application is required for legitimate work, where it originated, whether the publisher or signature is valid, and whether organizational security processes approve its use. Reputation, vulnerability information, malware analysis, or other controls may also be appropriate. If the software is approved, a temporary exception or carefully scoped standard policy can be created. Broad administrator rights or EPM disablement would create unnecessary exposure. Privilege should follow verified business need and application trust.<\/span><\/p>\n

                Question 308.<\/b><\/p>\n

                A user needs elevated access for a support tool during a single maintenance session. Which approach BEST supports least privilege?<\/b><\/p>\n

                  \n
                1. <\/b> Permanent administrator membership<\/span><\/li>\n
                2. <\/b> Global elevation for the support tool<\/span><\/li>\n
                3. <\/b> Disabling EPM for the day<\/span><\/li>\n
                4. <\/b> A temporary, narrowly scoped elevation with an expiration**<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                  Correct Answer: 4. A temporary, narrowly scoped elevation with an expiration<\/b><\/p>\n

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

                  A one-time support task should not result in permanent standing privilege. A temporary exception can be limited to the required user, endpoint, application, and approved maintenance window. An expiration time ensures that access is removed automatically after the task is complete. The exception should also have a documented business justification and responsible owner. Permanent administrator rights or global elevation would significantly exceed the stated requirement. Disabling EPM would remove controls for unrelated activity. Time-bounded elevation provides flexibility while keeping the privileged exposure as small as possible.<\/span><\/p>\n

                  Question 309.<\/b><\/p>\n

                  An administrator sees an approved application blocked only after users install a newer version. What is the MOST likely cause?<\/b><\/p>\n

                    \n
                  1. <\/b> The newer version changed attributes used by the EPM policy<\/span><\/li>\n
                  2. <\/b> The endpoint monitor is too small<\/span><\/li>\n
                  3. <\/b> The user changed the desktop theme<\/span><\/li>\n
                  4. <\/b> The printer driver was updated<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                    Correct Answer: 1. The newer version changed attributes used by the EPM policy<\/b><\/p>\n

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

                    Application updates frequently modify hashes, versions, file names, installation paths, signatures, helper executables, or product metadata. If an existing rule relies on one of those properties, the updated application may stop matching. The administrator should examine the relevant EPM event and compare the updated file with the previous approved version. If the update is legitimate, the policy can be adjusted and tested carefully. This demonstrates why EPM policy maintenance should be coordinated with application lifecycle management. Peripheral and display changes are unrelated to software identity matching.<\/span><\/p>\n

                    Question 310.<\/b><\/p>\n

                    A policy elevates an application using only a trusted publisher. Why might this be too broad?<\/b><\/p>\n

                      \n
                    1. <\/b> Publishers cannot sign applications<\/span><\/li>\n
                    2. <\/b> The same publisher may sign multiple unrelated tools that should not receive elevation<\/span><\/li>\n
                    3. <\/b> Signed software cannot be elevated<\/span><\/li>\n
                    4. <\/b> Publisher information always changes daily<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                      Correct Answer: 2. The same publisher may sign multiple unrelated tools that should not receive elevation<\/b><\/p>\n

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

                      Publisher identity is a valuable trust attribute, but it usually identifies the software vendor rather than one specific product. Large vendors may sign many applications, including administrative utilities or products that users should not elevate. Administrators should combine publisher information with product name, executable name, path, version, or another supported property to narrow the rule. This retains the maintainability benefits of publisher-based trust while preventing unrelated signed software from inheriting privilege. Effective application identification should be durable enough for normal updates but specific enough to protect the least-privilege boundary.<\/span><\/p>\n

                      Question 311.<\/b><\/p>\n

                      A policy that should apply only to the IT department is also triggering for Finance users. What should the administrator review FIRST?<\/b><\/p>\n

                        \n
                      1. <\/b> Target group membership and policy scope<\/span><\/li>\n
                      2. <\/b> Printer configuration<\/span><\/li>\n
                      3. <\/b> Desktop wallpaper<\/span><\/li>\n
                      4. <\/b> Browser homepage<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                        Correct Answer: 1. Target group membership and policy scope<\/b><\/p>\n

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

                        Unexpected policy use by another department most commonly indicates an issue with targeting, inherited group membership, or overlapping assignments. The administrator should verify which users and endpoints are included in the effective policy scope and compare that with the approved design. Event records can identify the specific Finance users or endpoints triggering the rule. Once the target configuration is corrected, administrators should verify that affected devices receive the updated policy. Accurate policy scope is essential because a secure elevation rule still creates unnecessary risk if it applies to users who do not need it.<\/span><\/p>\n

                        Question 312.<\/b><\/p>\n

                        A user reports that an approved application is blocked. What is the BEST starting point for troubleshooting?<\/b><\/p>\n

                          \n
                        1. <\/b> Printer logs<\/span><\/li>\n
                        2. <\/b> The EPM event showing the application and effective policy action<\/span><\/li>\n
                        3. <\/b> User wallpaper history<\/span><\/li>\n
                        4. <\/b> Monitor configuration<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                          Correct Answer: 2. The EPM event showing the application and effective policy action<\/b><\/p>\n

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

                          The EPM event provides direct evidence of how the application was handled. It can identify the executable, user, endpoint, policy decision, and matching information needed to determine why the application was blocked. Administrators can then investigate whether the application changed after an update, another policy took precedence, or the endpoint is assigned to an unexpected scope. Beginning with actual event data reduces guesswork and avoids unnecessary changes. Unrelated endpoint settings do not explain application-control decisions and should not be part of the initial troubleshooting process.<\/span><\/p>\n

                          Question 313.<\/b><\/p>\n

                          An elevated application loads a plug-in from a directory standard users can modify. What is the MAIN risk?<\/b><\/p>\n

                            \n
                          1. <\/b> The application may use more memory<\/span><\/li>\n
                          2. <\/b> The plug-in may change screen resolution<\/span><\/li>\n
                          3. <\/b> A malicious plug-in could execute within the elevated process<\/span><\/li>\n
                          4. <\/b> The endpoint may lose policy synchronization<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                            Correct Answer: 3. A malicious plug-in could execute within the elevated process<\/b><\/p>\n

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

                            A trusted executable can still be exploited if it loads code from a user-writable location. An attacker may replace or create a plug-in that the elevated application loads, resulting in attacker-controlled code running with administrative privileges. Administrators should examine plug-in paths, DLL search behavior, scripts, configuration files, and other user-controlled dependencies before approving elevation. Supporting files should be stored in protected locations wherever possible. This scenario demonstrates why secure EPM policy design requires evaluating the complete privileged execution environment rather than trusting only the main executable.<\/span><\/p>\n

                            Question 314.<\/b><\/p>\n

                            An EPM administrator wants temporary exceptions to be removed when they are no longer required. Which governance practice is BEST?<\/b><\/p>\n

                              \n
                            1. <\/b> Make all exceptions permanent<\/span><\/li>\n
                            2. <\/b> Disable exception logging<\/span><\/li>\n
                            3. <\/b> Remove policy ownership information<\/span><\/li>\n
                            4. <\/b> Assign an owner, justification, scope, and expiration or review date**<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                              Correct Answer: 4. Assign an owner, justification, scope, and expiration or review date<\/b><\/p>\n

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

                              Temporary exceptions can become long-term security gaps when there is no lifecycle control. Each exception should identify who owns it, why it exists, which users or endpoints it affects, and when it should expire or be reviewed. Automatic expiration is valuable where supported because it removes access without requiring manual cleanup. Event history can also show whether the exception was used as expected. Making temporary rules permanent or removing accountability would allow unnecessary privileges to accumulate. Formal exception governance helps maintain least privilege over time.<\/span><\/p>\n

                              Question 315.<\/b><\/p>\n

                              An endpoint has the correct policy version but still treats one application differently from other endpoints. What should be compared NEXT?<\/b><\/p>\n

                                \n
                              1. <\/b> Application version, hash, signature, path, and local endpoint state<\/span><\/li>\n
                              2. <\/b> User desk number<\/span><\/li>\n
                              3. <\/b> Printer model<\/span><\/li>\n
                              4. <\/b> Desktop wallpaper<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                Correct Answer: 1. Application version, hash, signature, path, and local endpoint state<\/b><\/p>\n

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

                                If policy synchronization is confirmed, the remaining difference is likely local to the application or endpoint. The affected system may have a different executable version, altered hash, alternate path, invalid signature, or changed supporting component. Comparing the affected device with a known-working endpoint can expose these differences quickly. The administrator should also review the local event to confirm which rule matched. Changing a central policy before understanding the local variation could weaken protection for systems that are already functioning correctly.<\/span><\/p>\n

                                Question 316.<\/b><\/p>\n

                                A security administrator wants to know who changed an EPM policy that unexpectedly granted elevation. Which record is MOST useful?<\/b><\/p>\n

                                  \n
                                1. <\/b> Printer history<\/span><\/li>\n
                                2. <\/b> Desktop activity<\/span><\/li>\n
                                3. <\/b> Browser history<\/span><\/li>\n
                                4. <\/b> Administrative audit or policy change history**<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                  Correct Answer: 4. Administrative audit or policy change history<\/b><\/p>\n

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

                                  Administrative audit history provides the evidence needed to determine who created, modified, or deleted EPM policies and when the action occurred. This supports troubleshooting, accountability, incident investigation, and change management. Individual administrator identities make these records much more useful than shared accounts. Because EPM policies can affect large numbers of systems and potentially grant administrative capability, management actions should be treated as sensitive privileged operations. Peripheral and general user activity logs do not provide equivalent information about policy configuration changes.<\/span><\/p>\n

                                  Question 317.<\/b><\/p>\n

                                  A user moves from the IT department to Sales but remains in an IT EPM elevation group. What should the organization do?<\/b><\/p>\n

                                    \n
                                  1. <\/b> Remove the obsolete group membership and reassess current privilege requirements<\/span><\/li>\n
                                  2. <\/b> Keep all former IT privileges<\/span><\/li>\n
                                  3. <\/b> Add additional elevation groups<\/span><\/li>\n
                                  4. <\/b> Disable group-based policy targeting<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                    Correct Answer: 1. Remove the obsolete group membership and reassess current privilege requirements<\/b><\/p>\n

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

                                    Users should retain only the privileges required for their current responsibilities. Leaving a Sales user in an IT elevation group creates unnecessary access and violates least privilege. Role changes should trigger review of EPM group memberships and associated application privileges. The user can then be assigned only the policies required for the new position. Integrating EPM access changes into broader identity lifecycle processes helps prevent privilege accumulation. Group-based targeting remains useful; the issue is ensuring that membership is updated when business roles change.<\/span><\/p>\n

                                    Question 318.<\/b><\/p>\n

                                    A known malicious application is discovered during an active security incident. How should EPM be used?<\/b><\/p>\n

                                      \n
                                    1. <\/b> Wait until the next policy review<\/span><\/li>\n
                                    2. <\/b> Create a blocking policy using reliable identity criteria and verify endpoint synchronization<\/span><\/li>\n
                                    3. <\/b> Give users administrator rights so they can remove it<\/span><\/li>\n
                                    4. <\/b> Disable EPM event reporting<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                      Correct Answer: 2. Create a blocking policy using reliable identity criteria and verify endpoint synchronization<\/b><\/p>\n

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

                                      EPM can help reduce the spread or execution of known malicious software by rapidly distributing a blocking rule. The rule should use reliable application identity, such as a hash or other strong attributes, and should be targeted to the appropriate endpoint population. Administrators must verify that agents synchronize the new policy and monitor execution events for attempted use. Blocking should be coordinated with other incident-response controls because an EPM rule does not necessarily remove an existing compromise. Event visibility is especially important during active incidents.<\/span><\/p>\n

                                      Question 319.<\/b><\/p>\n

                                      A high-privilege EPM policy is triggered only a few times per year. What should the administrator do during periodic review?<\/b><\/p>\n

                                        \n
                                      1. <\/b> Confirm its owner, current business need, usage history, and whether temporary elevation would be safer<\/span><\/li>\n
                                      2. <\/b> Expand it to all users<\/span><\/li>\n
                                      3. <\/b> Disable monitoring<\/span><\/li>\n
                                      4. <\/b> Convert it to a global rule<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                        Correct Answer: 1. Confirm its owner, current business need, usage history, and whether temporary elevation would be safer<\/b><\/p>\n

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

                                        Rarely used powerful policies deserve close scrutiny because they may represent standing administrative capability with limited ongoing business value. Administrators should confirm who owns the rule, why it still exists, when it was last used, and whether a request-based or temporary elevation model would reduce risk. Low usage does not automatically mean the policy is unnecessary, but it is a strong signal for recertification. Expanding the rule or removing monitoring would increase risk without business justification. High-impact privileges should remain only when there is clear continuing need.<\/span><\/p>\n

                                        Question 320.<\/b><\/p>\n

                                        Which statement BEST describes a mature CyberArk EPM operational security program?<\/b><\/p>\n

                                          \n
                                        1. <\/b> Elevate broadly to avoid user complaints<\/span><\/li>\n
                                        2. <\/b> Trust all software from known vendors<\/span><\/li>\n
                                        3. <\/b> Focus only on removing local administrator rights<\/span><\/li>\n
                                        4. <\/b> Combine least privilege, application control, strong identity, precise targeting, event monitoring, controlled exceptions, agent health, and policy recertification**<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                          Correct Answer: 4. Combine least privilege, application control, strong identity, precise targeting, event monitoring, controlled exceptions, agent health, and policy recertification<\/b><\/p>\n

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

                                          A mature EPM program combines technical enforcement with continuous governance. Least privilege reduces standing administrative access, while application control and strong application identity determine which software may run or elevate. Precise targeting restricts privileges to the users and endpoints that require them. Event monitoring supports troubleshooting, security investigation, and policy improvement. Exceptions should be justified, time limited, and periodically reviewed. Agent health and policy synchronization must also be monitored so endpoints enforce current rules. Finally, policies should be recertified as applications, users, departments, and security risks change over time.<\/span><\/p>\n

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

                                          View Full CyberArk EPM-DEF Exam Dumps and Practice Test Dumps   Question 301. An EPM administrator wants to prevent a trusted elevated application from being replaced by a user-controlled executable. Which control is MOST important? Protect the application’s installation directory with restrictive file permissions Increase endpoint storage Change the application icon Add a desktop shortcut […]<\/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\/19786"}],"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=19786"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.examlabs.com\/certification\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/19786\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":19787,"href":"https:\/\/www.examlabs.com\/certification\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/19786\/revisions\/19787"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.examlabs.com\/certification\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=19786"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.examlabs.com\/certification\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=19786"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.examlabs.com\/certification\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=19786"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}