{"id":24788,"date":"2026-09-30T05:56:57","date_gmt":"2026-09-30T05:56:57","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.examlabs.com\/certification\/?p=24788"},"modified":"2026-09-30T05:56:57","modified_gmt":"2026-09-30T05:56:57","slug":"crowdstrike-ccfh-202b-test-practice-test-questions-and-exam-dumps-part7-q121-140","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.examlabs.com\/certification\/crowdstrike-ccfh-202b-test-practice-test-questions-and-exam-dumps-part7-q121-140\/","title":{"rendered":"CrowdStrike CCFH-202b Test Practice Test Questions and Exam Dumps Part7 Q121-140"},"content":{"rendered":"

View Full <\/b>CrowdStrike CCFH-202b Exam Dumps<\/b><\/a> and Practice Test Dumps<\/b><\/h2>\n

 <\/p>\n

Question 121.<\/b><\/p>\n

A Falcon Hunter observes an unfamiliar process spawning from a browser shortly after a user visits a suspicious website. What should the hunter investigate first?<\/b><\/p>\n

    \n
  1. <\/b> The process tree, command line, browser activity, downloaded files, and network connections<\/span>
    \n<\/span>2.<\/b> The user’s printer configuration<\/span>
    \n<\/span>3.<\/b> Only the process filename<\/span>
    \n<\/span>4.<\/b> The endpoint’s desktop theme<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    Correct Answer: 1<\/b><\/p>\n

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

    A browser spawning an unfamiliar child process can indicate exploitation, drive-by download activity, or malicious script execution. The hunter should examine the full execution chain, browser process, command line, files written, user context, and outbound connections. The filename alone may not reveal whether the activity is malicious because attackers can rename tools easily. Correlating browser and endpoint telemetry helps reconstruct how the suspicious process was introduced.<\/span><\/p>\n

    Question 122.<\/b><\/p>\n

    Which behavior most strongly suggests persistence through registry modification?<\/b><\/p>\n

      \n
    1. <\/b> A browser updates normally<\/span>
      \n<\/span>2.<\/b> A user opens a document<\/span>
      \n<\/span>3.<\/b> A routine inventory process executes<\/span>
      \n<\/span>4.<\/b> An unknown process adds an executable to a registry location that launches programs at logon<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

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

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

      Registry locations used to automatically launch software at logon can provide persistence. An unfamiliar process modifying one of these locations should be investigated carefully. The hunter should determine which process made the change, what executable was referenced, which user was affected, and whether similar modifications occurred elsewhere. Legitimate applications also use startup registry entries, so signer, path, timing, and surrounding behavior are important for validation.<\/span><\/p>\n

      Question 123.<\/b><\/p>\n

      Which telemetry is most useful when investigating possible lateral movement through remote services?<\/b><\/p>\n

        \n
      1. <\/b> Display configuration<\/span>
        \n<\/span>2.<\/b> Printer status<\/span>
        \n<\/span>3.<\/b> Authentication events, remote service activity, source and destination hosts, and resulting processes<\/span>
        \n<\/span>4.<\/b> Local font inventory<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

        Correct Answer: 3<\/b><\/p>\n

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

        Remote service activity often combines authentication with process execution on another endpoint. The hunter should identify the source host, destination system, user account, remote access mechanism, and any process created afterward. This helps distinguish legitimate administration from adversary movement. Looking at authentication alone may show that access occurred but not what actions followed after the session was established.<\/span><\/p>\n

        Question 124.<\/b><\/p>\n

        Which approach is most effective when investigating suspicious use of a command interpreter such as cmd.exe?<\/b><\/p>\n

          \n
        1. <\/b> Treat all command-shell activity as malicious<\/span>
          \n<\/span>2.<\/b> Review command-line arguments, parent process, user context, children, and related network or file activity<\/span>
          \n<\/span>3.<\/b> Ignore the process because it is built into Windows<\/span>
          \n<\/span>4.<\/b> Search only for the process filename<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

          Correct Answer: 2<\/b><\/p>\n

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

          Command interpreters are legitimate system tools but are also frequently abused by attackers. The most useful evidence comes from how the interpreter was launched and what commands it executed. Parent-child relationships, command-line syntax, user context, child processes, file changes, and network connections can reveal malicious use. Focusing only on the executable name creates too much noise and can miss meaningful behavior.<\/span><\/p>\n

          Question 125.<\/b><\/p>\n

          A hunter finds a rare executable running on one server. Which action is most appropriate?<\/b><\/p>\n

            \n
          1. <\/b> Investigate the file hash, signer, execution path, parent process, command line, and related behavior<\/span>
            \n<\/span>2.<\/b> Automatically classify it as malicious because it is rare<\/span>
            \n<\/span>3.<\/b> Ignore it because only one host contains it<\/span>
            \n<\/span>4.<\/b> Delete all events involving the file<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

            Correct Answer: 1<\/b><\/p>\n

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

            Rarity is a useful hunting signal but does not establish maliciousness. A rare executable may be specialized business software or a newly introduced attacker tool. The hunter should evaluate multiple contextual factors, including path, hash, signer, parent process, user, network activity, and timing. Combining rarity with suspicious behavior provides a stronger basis for determining whether the process warrants response.<\/span><\/p>\n

            Question 126.<\/b><\/p>\n

            Which pattern most strongly suggests beaconing behavior?<\/b><\/p>\n

              \n
            1. <\/b> A local application reads a configuration file<\/span>
              \n<\/span>2.<\/b> A user opens a spreadsheet<\/span>
              \n<\/span>3.<\/b> A standard update checks once for a new version<\/span>
              \n<\/span>4.<\/b> A process makes repeated outbound connections to a rare destination at nearly consistent intervals<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

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

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

              Repeated connections at regular intervals can indicate command-and-control beaconing. The hunter should examine the initiating process, timing pattern, destination, DNS events, and whether the same behavior appears across multiple hosts. Legitimate software can also communicate periodically, so the process purpose and expected baseline must be considered. Beaconing becomes more suspicious when accompanied by unusual execution, persistence, or credential activity.<\/span><\/p>\n

              Question 127.<\/b><\/p>\n

              Which event pattern is most relevant when hunting for possible credential dumping?<\/b><\/p>\n

                \n
              1. <\/b> A user launches a calculator<\/span>
                \n<\/span>2.<\/b> A browser opens an approved site<\/span>
                \n<\/span>3.<\/b> An unexpected process accesses credential-related memory or authentication components<\/span>
                \n<\/span>4.<\/b> A scheduled backup starts<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                Correct Answer: 3<\/b><\/p>\n

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

                Credential dumping often involves processes interacting with sensitive memory or authentication resources. The hunter should inspect the process, privilege level, parent process, command line, and user context. Subsequent unusual logons or remote access may indicate that captured credentials were used elsewhere. Legitimate security tools may access similar resources, so frequency, signer, role, and surrounding behavior should be considered.<\/span><\/p>\n

                Question 128.<\/b><\/p>\n

                Which statement best explains the value of grouping hunting results by command line?<\/b><\/p>\n

                  \n
                1. <\/b> It guarantees matching commands are malicious.<\/span>
                  \n<\/span>2.<\/b> It can reveal recurring or unusual execution patterns across many hosts.<\/span>
                  \n<\/span>3.<\/b> It removes the need to investigate individual events.<\/span>
                  \n<\/span>4.<\/b> It is useful only for software inventory.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                  Correct Answer: 2<\/b><\/p>\n

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

                  Grouping by command line can expose patterns that are difficult to see in individual records. A suspicious command may appear on many systems, or one rare command may stand out among otherwise common administrative activity. Aggregation helps the hunter prioritize where to investigate deeper. Individual events should still be reviewed to understand parent processes, users, timestamps, and related behavior.<\/span><\/p>\n

                  Question 129.<\/b><\/p>\n

                  A hunter observes a document application launching PowerShell followed by a file download. What is the best interpretation?<\/b><\/p>\n

                    \n
                  1. <\/b> The sequence is suspicious and should be investigated as possible malicious document execution.<\/span>
                    \n<\/span>2.<\/b> The sequence is always normal.<\/span>
                    \n<\/span>3.<\/b> The download proves the user’s account is compromised.<\/span>
                    \n<\/span>4.<\/b> PowerShell activity should be ignored because it is legitimate software.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                    Correct Answer: 1<\/b><\/p>\n

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

                    A document application launching PowerShell and then downloading a file is a suspicious execution chain often associated with malicious documents or exploitation. The hunter should review the document origin, parent-child relationships, command line, destination, file hash, and resulting execution. The behavior is not automatically malicious, but the combination of unusual process ancestry and network activity provides a strong hunting lead.<\/span><\/p>\n

                    Question 130.<\/b><\/p>\n

                    Which behavior most strongly suggests data staging before exfiltration?<\/b><\/p>\n

                      \n
                    1. <\/b> A routine application saves a configuration file<\/span>
                      \n<\/span>2.<\/b> A user opens an approved website<\/span>
                      \n<\/span>3.<\/b> A normal software patch installs<\/span>
                      \n<\/span>4.<\/b> A process gathers documents from multiple directories and creates a large compressed archive<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

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

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

                      Attackers often stage data by collecting and compressing files before transferring them externally. A large archive created from several directories can indicate this behavior, especially if followed by unusual network activity. The hunter should inspect the responsible process, source files, archive destination, user context, and subsequent outbound connections. Legitimate backup and archiving tools should be considered as possible explanations.<\/span><\/p>\n

                      Question 131.<\/b><\/p>\n

                      Which hunting method is most effective when attackers frequently modify file hashes but retain the same process behavior?<\/b><\/p>\n

                        \n
                      1. <\/b> Exact-hash searching only<\/span>
                        \n<\/span>2.<\/b> Filename searching only<\/span>
                        \n<\/span>3.<\/b> Behavioral hunting using process relationships, command lines, and event sequences<\/span>
                        \n<\/span>4.<\/b> Ignoring process telemetry<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                        Correct Answer: 3<\/b><\/p>\n

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

                        Attackers can change file hashes easily by modifying binaries, but their execution behavior may remain similar. Hunting based on process ancestry, command patterns, persistence techniques, and activity sequences provides more durable detection. Static indicators such as hashes are still valuable for immediate scoping, but behavioral analytics can continue identifying related activity after those indicators change.<\/span><\/p>\n

                        Question 132.<\/b><\/p>\n

                        Which statement best describes the purpose of baselining user behavior?<\/b><\/p>\n

                          \n
                        1. <\/b> It proves all common activity is legitimate.<\/span>
                          \n<\/span>2.<\/b> It helps identify deviations from a user’s normal systems, times, and activity patterns.<\/span>
                          \n<\/span>3.<\/b> It eliminates the need for investigation.<\/span>
                          \n<\/span>4.<\/b> It automatically blocks unusual logins.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                          Correct Answer: 2<\/b><\/p>\n

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

                          User baselines help hunters understand which systems, applications, and times are typical for an account. Significant deviations can become useful investigative leads, especially for possible credential compromise or insider activity. Unusual behavior is not automatically malicious, so it must be evaluated in context. Baselines are most useful when combined with authentication, process, network, and privilege telemetry.<\/span><\/p>\n

                          Question 133.<\/b><\/p>\n

                          A user account suddenly authenticates to several servers it has never accessed before. What should the hunter investigate first?<\/b><\/p>\n

                            \n
                          1. <\/b> Source host, authentication method, destinations, timing, and resulting process activity<\/span>
                            \n<\/span>2.<\/b> Only the user’s job title<\/span>
                            \n<\/span>3.<\/b> Printer configuration<\/span>
                            \n<\/span>4.<\/b> Screen resolution<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                            Correct Answer: 1<\/b><\/p>\n

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

                            New access to multiple servers may indicate legitimate role changes, administrative work, or lateral movement using stolen credentials. The hunter should examine where the activity originated, how authentication occurred, which systems were accessed, and what processes or commands followed. Historical behavior and user role provide important context. The sequence of authentication and execution can reveal whether the activity resembles adversary movement.<\/span><\/p>\n

                            Question 134.<\/b><\/p>\n

                            Which behavior most strongly suggests defense evasion?<\/b><\/p>\n

                              \n
                            1. <\/b> A user opens a normal application<\/span>
                              \n<\/span>2.<\/b> A scheduled update installs<\/span>
                              \n<\/span>3.<\/b> A routine inventory scan finishes<\/span>
                              \n<\/span>4.<\/b> A process disables endpoint protection and deletes logs or artifacts immediately afterward<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

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

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

                              Disabling endpoint protection and removing evidence are both common defense-evasion behaviors. When they occur in sequence, the activity becomes especially suspicious because the actor may be preparing to execute additional malicious actions with reduced visibility. The hunter should inspect the process, user, parent process, commands, timing, and subsequent host activity. Any remaining evidence should be preserved for further analysis.<\/span><\/p>\n

                              Question 135.<\/b><\/p>\n

                              Which approach is best after identifying a suspicious IP address in one host’s network telemetry?<\/b><\/p>\n

                                \n
                              1. <\/b> Ignore the initiating process<\/span>
                                \n<\/span>2.<\/b> Search only external reputation sources<\/span>
                                \n<\/span>3.<\/b> Search the IP across enterprise telemetry and identify related hosts, users, processes, and timestamps<\/span>
                                \n<\/span>4.<\/b> Delete the original connection event<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                Correct Answer: 3<\/b><\/p>\n

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

                                Searching the IP across enterprise telemetry helps establish scope and local context. The hunter can determine which hosts contacted the address, which processes were responsible, which users were active, and whether communication occurred during related suspicious activity. Reputation information can help, but local telemetry is necessary to understand the relevance of the destination inside the environment.<\/span><\/p>\n

                                Question 136.<\/b><\/p>\n

                                Which statement best describes the role of threat intelligence in hypothesis-driven hunting?<\/b><\/p>\n

                                  \n
                                1. <\/b> It replaces endpoint telemetry.<\/span>
                                  \n<\/span>2.<\/b> It can provide adversary behaviors or indicators that help formulate and prioritize hunting hypotheses.<\/span>
                                  \n<\/span>3.<\/b> It guarantees every match is malicious.<\/span>
                                  \n<\/span>4.<\/b> It is useful only after an investigation ends.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                  Correct Answer: 2<\/b><\/p>\n

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

                                  Threat intelligence can identify adversary techniques, infrastructure patterns, targeting trends, and behaviors that may be relevant to the organization. Hunters can use that information to create focused hypotheses and searches. A threat-intelligence match still requires local validation because indicators can become outdated or shared by legitimate services. Intelligence is most valuable when combined with endpoint and identity context.<\/span><\/p>\n

                                  Question 137.<\/b><\/p>\n

                                  A hunter finds an unapproved remote access utility installed on several endpoints. What is the best next step?<\/b><\/p>\n

                                    \n
                                  1. <\/b> Investigate installation source, execution history, users, destinations, and related network activity<\/span>
                                    \n<\/span>2.<\/b> Assume every instance is malicious immediately<\/span>
                                    \n<\/span>3.<\/b> Ignore it because remote access utilities are legitimate software<\/span>
                                    \n<\/span>4.<\/b> Delete all endpoint telemetry<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                    Correct Answer: 1<\/b><\/p>\n

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

                                    Remote access utilities have legitimate uses but can also provide attackers with persistent interactive access. The hunter should determine who installed the software, when it appeared, how it was launched, which external or internal systems it contacted, and whether its use aligns with approved business processes. Cross-host analysis can reveal whether the same deployment mechanism or user is associated with multiple installations.<\/span><\/p>\n

                                    Question 138.<\/b><\/p>\n

                                    Which behavior most strongly suggests privilege escalation?<\/b><\/p>\n

                                      \n
                                    1. <\/b> A browser launches under the user’s normal account<\/span>
                                      \n<\/span>2.<\/b> An approved application starts normally<\/span>
                                      \n<\/span>3.<\/b> A scheduled backup completes<\/span>
                                      \n<\/span>4.<\/b> A low-privilege process unexpectedly results in execution under a highly privileged context<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

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

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

                                      An unexpected transition from low privilege to highly privileged execution can indicate exploitation or abuse of an elevation mechanism. The hunter should inspect the parent-child relationship, user account, command line, privileges, and any changes made after elevation. Legitimate software installation or administrative workflows can also cause privilege changes, so the surrounding context and baseline should be considered carefully.<\/span><\/p>\n

                                      Question 139.<\/b><\/p>\n

                                      Which investigation technique is most useful for reconstructing an attack chain on an individual endpoint?<\/b><\/p>\n

                                        \n
                                      1. <\/b> Reviewing only the detection title<\/span>
                                        \n<\/span>2.<\/b> Searching only one domain<\/span>
                                        \n<\/span>3.<\/b> Building a chronological timeline of process, file, network, and authentication events<\/span>
                                        \n<\/span>4.<\/b> Reviewing only installed software<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                        Correct Answer: 3<\/b><\/p>\n

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

                                        A chronological timeline helps the hunter understand the order in which events occurred and how they relate. It can reveal initial execution, persistence, credential access, lateral movement preparation, command-and-control communication, and other follow-on actions. Individual detections may capture only one point in the sequence. Timelining provides broader context and can expose activity that was not initially flagged.<\/span><\/p>\n

                                        Question 140.<\/b><\/p>\n

                                        Which action best completes a successful hunt after malicious activity is confirmed?<\/b><\/p>\n

                                          \n
                                        1. <\/b> Delete the investigation notes<\/span>
                                          \n<\/span>2.<\/b> Document findings, establish scope, support containment and remediation, and improve future detections or hunting queries<\/span>
                                          \n<\/span>3.<\/b> Disable related telemetry<\/span>
                                          \n<\/span>4.<\/b> Leave the behavior undocumented<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                          Correct Answer: 2<\/b><\/p>\n

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

                                          A successful threat hunt should produce value beyond the immediate finding. The hunter should document affected hosts, users, evidence, timelines, and behavioral patterns, then coordinate appropriate response actions. Useful hunting queries can be converted into reusable detections or analytics. Lessons learned may also identify telemetry gaps or opportunities to improve future hunting, helping the defensive program become more effective over time.<\/span><\/p>\n

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

                                          View Full CrowdStrike CCFH-202b Exam Dumps and Practice Test Dumps   Question 121. A Falcon Hunter observes an unfamiliar process spawning from a browser shortly after a user visits a suspicious website. What should the hunter investigate first? The process tree, command line, browser activity, downloaded files, and network connections 2. The user’s printer configuration […]<\/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\/24788"}],"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=24788"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.examlabs.com\/certification\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/24788\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":24789,"href":"https:\/\/www.examlabs.com\/certification\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/24788\/revisions\/24789"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.examlabs.com\/certification\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=24788"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.examlabs.com\/certification\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=24788"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.examlabs.com\/certification\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=24788"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}