{"id":19788,"date":"2026-09-23T07:35:43","date_gmt":"2026-09-23T07:35:43","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.examlabs.com\/certification\/?p=19788"},"modified":"2026-09-23T07:35:43","modified_gmt":"2026-09-23T07:35:43","slug":"cyberark-epm-def-practice-test-questions-and-exam-dumps-part17-q321-340","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.examlabs.com\/certification\/cyberark-epm-def-practice-test-questions-and-exam-dumps-part17-q321-340\/","title":{"rendered":"CyberArk EPM-DEF Practice Test Questions and Exam Dumps Part17 Q321-340"},"content":{"rendered":"

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

 <\/p>\n

Question 321.<\/b><\/p>\n

An EPM administrator wants to reduce the risk of a trusted executable being replaced by a malicious file in the same folder. Which control is MOST important?<\/b><\/p>\n

    \n
  1. <\/b> Restrict write access to the trusted installation directory<\/span><\/li>\n
  2. <\/b> Increase endpoint RAM<\/span><\/li>\n
  3. <\/b> Change the application’s icon<\/span><\/li>\n
  4. <\/b> Add a second desktop shortcut<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    Correct Answer: 1. Restrict write access to the trusted installation directory<\/b><\/p>\n

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

    A trusted application policy can be undermined if standard users are able to replace or modify the executable that receives elevation. Restrictive file-system permissions help ensure that only authorized installation or administrative processes can change trusted application files. This should be combined with reliable application identification such as publisher information, product metadata, a digital signature, or a hash. Administrators should also review supporting DLLs, scripts, plug-ins, and configuration files because these components may influence privileged behavior. Increasing memory or changing visual application properties does not protect the privilege boundary. Strong EPM design depends on both accurate policy matching and protection of the underlying trusted files.<\/span><\/p>\n

    Question 322.<\/b><\/p>\n

    A frequently updated business application is signed by the same vendor for every release. Which identification strategy BEST balances security and maintainability?<\/b><\/p>\n

      \n
    1. <\/b> Use a fixed hash from the first version forever<\/span><\/li>\n
    2. <\/b> Use trusted publisher information combined with product-specific criteria<\/span><\/li>\n
    3. <\/b> Trust all signed software<\/span><\/li>\n
    4. <\/b> Use filename only<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

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

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

      Publisher-based identification can continue working across legitimate software updates because the vendor consistently signs new versions. However, publisher identity alone may be too broad if the vendor signs multiple products or administrative utilities. Combining publisher data with product name, executable name, path, version, or other application-specific attributes narrows the rule to the intended software. This reduces maintenance compared with exact hash matching while preserving a meaningful trust boundary. Trusting every signed file would be overly permissive, and filename-only rules are easy to spoof. A mature policy should remain durable enough for normal application lifecycle changes without extending elevation to unrelated software.<\/span><\/p>\n

      Question 323.<\/b><\/p>\n

      A blocking policy is intended for all managed endpoints, but several laptops are still allowing the application. What should the administrator verify FIRST?<\/b><\/p>\n

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

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

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

        If some endpoints behave differently from the rest, administrators should first determine whether those systems actually received the latest policy. Remote laptops may have been offline, may have communication problems, or may still be enforcing an older cached configuration. The administrator should review agent health, recent check-in status, synchronization results, certificates, and local policy version. Only after confirming that the correct policy is present should application identity or local endpoint differences be investigated. Printer and desktop settings do not affect EPM rule distribution. Consistent policy synchronization is fundamental to reliable application control across distributed endpoint populations.<\/span><\/p>\n

        Question 324.<\/b><\/p>\n

        An elevated application can launch any executable chosen by the user. What is the MAIN security concern?<\/b><\/p>\n

          \n
        1. <\/b> The user may create too many shortcuts<\/span><\/li>\n
        2. <\/b> The endpoint may use more CPU<\/span><\/li>\n
        3. <\/b> The application may lose its digital signature<\/span><\/li>\n
        4. <\/b> Arbitrary child processes may inherit administrative privileges**<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

          Correct Answer: 4. Arbitrary child processes may inherit administrative privileges<\/b><\/p>\n

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

          If users can select arbitrary child executables from within an elevated application and those processes inherit privilege, the approved application can become a general-purpose administrative bypass. Administrators should examine process inheritance, command-line options, file selection behavior, script execution, and any ability for users to influence child-process creation. The policy may need to restrict which child components receive elevation or use a different workflow entirely. Secure EPM policy design must consider the whole process tree, not only the initial executable. The main concern is the expansion of privilege beyond the intended business task.<\/span><\/p>\n

          Question 325.<\/b><\/p>\n

          Which application-identification method is MOST precise for one exact executable version?<\/b><\/p>\n

            \n
          1. <\/b> Cryptographic hash<\/span><\/li>\n
          2. <\/b> File extension<\/span><\/li>\n
          3. <\/b> Desktop shortcut<\/span><\/li>\n
          4. <\/b> Folder label<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

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

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

            A cryptographic hash provides highly precise identification of a file because it is calculated from the file contents. Even a small modification normally changes the resulting hash. This makes hash-based matching useful for high-risk applications where administrators want to approve or block one exact binary. The trade-off is maintenance because legitimate patches and upgrades usually generate new hashes. Filenames, extensions, and shortcut properties are much easier to imitate and do not provide comparable assurance. Hash matching is therefore best when precision is more important than automatic compatibility with future software versions.<\/span><\/p>\n

            Question 326.<\/b><\/p>\n

            An organization wants elevation for an approved product only on Finance endpoints. Which policy design is BEST?<\/b><\/p>\n

              \n
            1. <\/b> Trust the application globally<\/span><\/li>\n
            2. <\/b> Combine strong application identification with Finance-specific endpoint targeting<\/span><\/li>\n
            3. <\/b> Give Finance users permanent administrator rights<\/span><\/li>\n
            4. <\/b> Disable policy targeting<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

              Correct Answer: 2. Combine strong application identification with Finance-specific endpoint targeting<\/b><\/p>\n

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

              Least privilege applies both to the software being elevated and to the users or endpoints allowed to receive that privilege. Strong application identification helps ensure that only the intended product matches the policy, while Finance-specific targeting limits the elevation to systems where it is actually required. Administrators should verify group membership and regularly review endpoint assignments so reassigned devices do not retain old privileges. Global application trust or permanent administrator membership would expose many more systems and processes than necessary. Precise targeting is one of the most effective ways to reduce the attack surface of endpoint privilege policies.<\/span><\/p>\n

              Question 327.<\/b><\/p>\n

              A user requests elevation for a tool downloaded from an unfamiliar website. What should the EPM administrator do FIRST?<\/b><\/p>\n

                \n
              1. <\/b> Elevate the application immediately<\/span><\/li>\n
              2. <\/b> Make the user a local administrator<\/span><\/li>\n
              3. <\/b> Validate the software’s source, business need, identity, and security risk<\/span><\/li>\n
              4. <\/b> Disable application control<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

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

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

                A user request should not be treated as proof that software is trustworthy. Administrators should confirm why the tool is needed, where it came from, whether it has a valid signature or known publisher, and whether its security profile is acceptable. Depending on organizational procedures, reputation checks, vulnerability review, or malware analysis may also be appropriate. If the software is approved, the administrator can then create a temporary exception or a narrowly scoped standard policy. Granting administrator rights or disabling EPM would create a broader security gap than the original request. Trust should be established before privilege is granted.<\/span><\/p>\n

                Question 328.<\/b><\/p>\n

                A user requires elevated access for a single two-hour troubleshooting session. Which EPM approach BEST supports least privilege?<\/b><\/p>\n

                  \n
                1. <\/b> Permanent administrator membership<\/span><\/li>\n
                2. <\/b> Global elevation for the user’s account<\/span><\/li>\n
                3. <\/b> Disable EPM until troubleshooting is complete<\/span><\/li>\n
                4. <\/b> Provide a temporary, narrowly scoped elevation that expires automatically**<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                  Correct Answer: 4. Provide a temporary, narrowly scoped elevation that expires automatically<\/b><\/p>\n

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

                  A short-lived requirement should result in short-lived privilege. The temporary exception should be limited to the necessary application, user, endpoint, and approved time window. Automatic expiration reduces the chance that access remains in place after the troubleshooting task ends. The request should also have a clear business justification and responsible owner. Permanent administrator access would remain available far beyond the stated need, while disabling EPM would remove protection from unrelated applications. Time-bounded elevation provides operational flexibility while preserving the broader least-privilege model.<\/span><\/p>\n

                  Question 329.<\/b><\/p>\n

                  After a software update, users report that an approved application is suddenly blocked. What should the administrator investigate FIRST?<\/b><\/p>\n

                    \n
                  1. <\/b> Whether the update changed attributes used by the EPM application definition<\/span><\/li>\n
                  2. <\/b> Printer configuration<\/span><\/li>\n
                  3. <\/b> Desktop wallpaper<\/span><\/li>\n
                  4. <\/b> Screen resolution<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                    Correct Answer: 1. Whether the update changed attributes used by the EPM application definition<\/b><\/p>\n

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

                    Software updates may change the file hash, version, path, executable name, signature, product metadata, or helper processes. Any of these changes can cause an application to stop matching its previous EPM policy. Administrators should compare the updated application with the old approved version and review the relevant event to see which rule actually applied. If the new version is legitimate, the policy can be adjusted and retested. Application updates should therefore be integrated with EPM policy lifecycle management. Unrelated endpoint settings have no meaningful effect on application identity matching.<\/span><\/p>\n

                    Question 330.<\/b><\/p>\n

                    A policy elevates all applications from a trusted publisher. Why might this be insecure?<\/b><\/p>\n

                      \n
                    1. <\/b> Publisher information cannot be verified<\/span><\/li>\n
                    2. <\/b> The publisher may sign unrelated applications that should not receive elevation<\/span><\/li>\n
                    3. <\/b> Signed applications cannot run on managed endpoints<\/span><\/li>\n
                    4. <\/b> Digital signatures always expire immediately<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

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

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

                      A trusted publisher may produce many applications, some of which are administrative utilities, development tools, or unrelated products that should not be privileged. A publisher-only rule can therefore grant elevation more broadly than intended. Administrators should combine publisher information with product name, executable name, version, path, or other application-specific criteria. This keeps the rule maintainable across legitimate software updates while reducing unintended privilege. A valid signature proves origin and integrity, not whether every application from that vendor is appropriate for elevation.<\/span><\/p>\n

                      Question 331.<\/b><\/p>\n

                      An EPM policy meant for a small group is being triggered by users in other departments. What should be checked FIRST?<\/b><\/p>\n

                        \n
                      1. <\/b> Policy scope, group membership, and inherited assignments<\/span><\/li>\n
                      2. <\/b> Printer inventory<\/span><\/li>\n
                      3. <\/b> Desktop icon layout<\/span><\/li>\n
                      4. <\/b> Browser bookmarks<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                        Correct Answer: 1. Policy scope, group membership, and inherited assignments<\/b><\/p>\n

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

                        Unexpected use outside the intended population often results from overly broad targeting, stale group membership, or inherited assignments. Administrators should review user and endpoint groups, nested membership, and any overlapping rules that might extend the policy’s effective scope. Event records can identify which users and devices are triggering the rule. Once corrected, administrators should verify that endpoints synchronize the revised policy. Precise targeting is critical because even an otherwise secure elevation rule can create unnecessary exposure if it is available to users who do not need it.<\/span><\/p>\n

                        Question 332.<\/b><\/p>\n

                        A user claims that EPM incorrectly blocked a business application. What is the BEST starting point for troubleshooting?<\/b><\/p>\n

                          \n
                        1. <\/b> Office seating chart<\/span><\/li>\n
                        2. <\/b> The EPM event showing the effective policy decision<\/span><\/li>\n
                        3. <\/b> Printer logs<\/span><\/li>\n
                        4. <\/b> Wallpaper history<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

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

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

                          The EPM event tied to the execution provides direct evidence about what happened. It can identify the executable, user, endpoint, policy action, and other details needed to understand why the application was blocked. Administrators can then determine whether the software changed, a different policy took precedence, or the endpoint has an unexpected assignment. Starting with actual event evidence is far more effective than guessing or making broad policy changes. Unrelated workplace or personalization data does not explain application-control outcomes.<\/span><\/p>\n

                          Question 333.<\/b><\/p>\n

                          An elevated application reads plug-ins from a directory where standard users have write permission. What is the PRIMARY risk?<\/b><\/p>\n

                            \n
                          1. <\/b> The application may use additional disk space<\/span><\/li>\n
                          2. <\/b> Plug-ins may disable printing<\/span><\/li>\n
                          3. <\/b> A malicious plug-in may execute inside the elevated process<\/span><\/li>\n
                          4. <\/b> The endpoint may lose network access<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

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

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

                            When an elevated process loads executable content from a user-writable location, a standard user or attacker may be able to substitute malicious code that executes with administrative privilege. This can bypass the intended trust model even if the main executable is signed and approved. Administrators should examine plug-in paths, DLL loading, scripts, configuration files, and other dependencies used by the elevated process. Supporting components should be protected from modification or otherwise validated. Secure EPM design requires evaluating all code and inputs that can influence privileged execution.<\/span><\/p>\n

                            Question 334.<\/b><\/p>\n

                            An EPM administrator wants a temporary exception to expire automatically at the end of a project. Which control is MOST appropriate?<\/b><\/p>\n

                              \n
                            1. <\/b> Global policy targeting<\/span><\/li>\n
                            2. <\/b> Disabled event logging<\/span><\/li>\n
                            3. <\/b> Shared administrator credentials<\/span><\/li>\n
                            4. <\/b> A defined expiration date or time-bounded policy**<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                              Correct Answer: 4. A defined expiration date or time-bounded policy<\/b><\/p>\n

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

                              Temporary exceptions should have a clear end point so they do not become permanent by accident. A defined expiration date ensures the privilege stops when the business requirement ends, while a review date provides a fallback where automatic expiration is not available. The exception should also document the owner, business reason, application, and target scope. Global targeting would broaden the exposure unnecessarily, while shared credentials and disabled logging would reduce accountability. Time-bounded exception governance is a key part of maintaining least privilege over long-running EPM deployments.<\/span><\/p>\n

                              Question 335.<\/b><\/p>\n

                              One endpoint behaves differently from others even though policy synchronization is current. What should the administrator compare NEXT?<\/b><\/p>\n

                                \n
                              1. <\/b> Application version, hash, signature, path, and local endpoint state<\/span><\/li>\n
                              2. <\/b> Printer model<\/span><\/li>\n
                              3. <\/b> Office location<\/span><\/li>\n
                              4. <\/b> Desktop theme<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

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

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

                                When the endpoint is confirmed to have the same current policy, local differences become the next likely cause. The application may be a different version, installed in another path, have a changed hash, or use a different signature. Local supporting files, permissions, or application configuration may also affect behavior. Administrators should compare the affected device with a known-working endpoint and review the corresponding EPM events. This targeted comparison avoids weakening a central policy that is functioning correctly on other systems.<\/span><\/p>\n

                                Question 336.<\/b><\/p>\n

                                A security manager wants to know which administrator changed an EPM rule that granted unexpected elevation. Which record is MOST useful?<\/b><\/p>\n

                                  \n
                                1. <\/b> Printer usage report<\/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 records are designed to provide accountability for policy changes. They can show which administrator made the change, when it occurred, and potentially which configuration was modified. This information supports incident investigation, troubleshooting, compliance, and change governance. Individual administrative identities are important because shared accounts reduce attribution quality. EPM policies can affect large numbers of endpoints, so changes should be treated as privileged administrative operations and retained in an auditable history.<\/span><\/p>\n

                                  Question 337.<\/b><\/p>\n

                                  A user transfers to a new department but remains in an old EPM elevation group. What should happen?<\/b><\/p>\n

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

                                    Privilege should reflect current responsibilities, not historical roles. When users transfer departments, old EPM group memberships should be reviewed and removed if no longer needed. Otherwise, they accumulate privileges from multiple roles and increase the impact of account compromise or misuse. The user should then receive only the elevation policies required for the new position. Integrating EPM access review with joiner, mover, and leaver processes helps keep targeting accurate and reduces long-term privilege accumulation.<\/span><\/p>\n

                                    Question 338.<\/b><\/p>\n

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

                                      \n
                                    1. <\/b> Wait for users to report it<\/span><\/li>\n
                                    2. <\/b> Create a blocking policy using reliable application identity and verify endpoint synchronization<\/span><\/li>\n
                                    3. <\/b> Give users administrator rights to remove it manually<\/span><\/li>\n
                                    4. <\/b> Disable event reporting<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

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

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

                                      EPM can support incident response by rapidly blocking execution of a known malicious application across the relevant endpoint population. Administrators should use strong identity criteria, such as a cryptographic hash or other reliable attributes, and then verify that agents receive and enforce the rule. Event monitoring can identify attempted executions or systems where the threat is already present. EPM blocking should complement other incident-response and endpoint-security actions, because preventing future execution does not necessarily remove an existing compromise. Visibility and synchronization are especially important during emergency policy deployment.<\/span><\/p>\n

                                      Question 339.<\/b><\/p>\n

                                      A rarely used EPM policy grants powerful administrative capability. What should the administrator do during periodic review?<\/b><\/p>\n

                                        \n
                                      1. <\/b> Confirm the business need, owner, usage history, and whether temporary elevation would be safer<\/span><\/li>\n
                                      2. <\/b> Expand the policy to more users<\/span><\/li>\n
                                      3. <\/b> Disable logging<\/span><\/li>\n
                                      4. <\/b> Make the rule global<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

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

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

                                        Rarely used high-impact privilege deserves careful recertification. Administrators should verify that the original business purpose still exists, confirm who owns the rule, review actual usage, and determine whether a temporary or request-based model would reduce standing exposure. Low frequency does not automatically mean the policy is unnecessary, but it is a strong signal that the rule should be reviewed. Expanding the scope or removing monitoring would increase risk without evidence of business benefit. Powerful privileges should remain available only when there is clear continuing justification.<\/span><\/p>\n

                                        Question 340.<\/b><\/p>\n

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

                                          \n
                                        1. <\/b> Create broad elevation rules to reduce help-desk workload<\/span><\/li>\n
                                        2. <\/b> Trust all applications from known publishers<\/span><\/li>\n
                                        3. <\/b> Remove local administrator rights and never revisit policy<\/span><\/li>\n
                                        4. <\/b> Combine least privilege, strong application identity, precise targeting, event analysis, controlled exceptions, agent health, change accountability, and regular recertification**<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

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

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

                                          A mature EPM program is continuous rather than static. Least privilege reduces standing administrative access, while strong application identification limits elevation and application-control decisions to intended software. Precise targeting ensures only authorized users and endpoints receive privilege. Event analysis supports troubleshooting, security investigations, and policy tuning. Temporary exceptions should be justified, time limited, and reviewed. Agent health and synchronization must be monitored so endpoints enforce current policy, while administrative changes should remain auditable. Regular recertification removes obsolete rules as applications, roles, and threats change. This combination provides effective endpoint defense without unnecessary business disruption.<\/span><\/p>\n

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

                                          View Full CyberArk EPM-DEF Exam Dumps and Practice Test Dumps   Question 321. An EPM administrator wants to reduce the risk of a trusted executable being replaced by a malicious file in the same folder. Which control is MOST important? Restrict write access to the trusted installation directory Increase endpoint RAM Change the application’s icon […]<\/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\/19788"}],"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=19788"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.examlabs.com\/certification\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/19788\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":19789,"href":"https:\/\/www.examlabs.com\/certification\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/19788\/revisions\/19789"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.examlabs.com\/certification\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=19788"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.examlabs.com\/certification\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=19788"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.examlabs.com\/certification\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=19788"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}