ECCouncil Updated 312-50v13 Exam Questions and Answers by samson

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation:

IDS cannot easily detect malicious content in encrypted traffic. Since the payload is encrypted (e.g., HTTPS, SSL/TLS), it is unreadable without decryption.

Statement B is therefore FALSE.

From CEH v13 Courseware:

Module 13: IDS, Firewalls and Honeypots → Limitations of IDS

Wired Equivalent Privacy (WEP) may be a security protocol, laid out in the IEEE wireless local area network (Wi-Fi) standard, 802.11b, that’s designed to supply a wireless local area network (WLAN) with A level of security and privacy like what’s usually expected of a wired LAN. A wired local area network (LAN) is usually protected by physical security mechanisms (controlled access to a building, for example) that are effective for a controlled physical environment, but could also be ineffective for WLANs because radio waves aren’t necessarily bound by the walls containing the network. WEP seeks to determine similar protection thereto offered by the wired network’s physical security measures by encrypting data transmitted over the WLAN. encoding protects the vulnerable wireless link between clients and access points; once this measure has been taken, other typical LAN security mechanisms like password protection, end-to-end encryption, virtual private networks (VPNs), and authentication are often put in situ to make sure privacy.

A research group from the University of California at Berkeley recently published a report citing “major security flaws” in WEP that left WLANs using the protocol susceptible to attacks (called wireless equivalent privacy attacks). within the course of the group’s examination of the technology, they were ready to intercept and modify transmissions and gain access to restricted networks. The Wireless Ethernet Compatibility Alliance (WECA) claims that WEP – which is included in many networking products – was never intended to be the only security mechanism for a WLAN, and that, in conjunction with traditional security practices, it’s very effective.

A Kerberoasting attack is a technique that exploits the Kerberos authentication protocol to obtain the password hash of a service account that has a Service Principal Name (SPN). An attacker can request a service ticket (TGS) for the SPN using a valid user’s ticket (TGT) and then attempt to crack the password hash offline. To prevent the attacker from using the TGS to access the service, the system administrator should invalidate the TGS as soon as possible. This can be done by changing the password of the service account, which will generate a new password hash and render the old TGS useless. Alternatively, the system administrator can use tools like Mimikatz to purge the TGS from the memory of the domain controller or the client system. Performing a system reboot, deleting the compromised user’s account, or changing the NTLM password hash used to encrypt the ST are not effective ways to invalidate the TGS, as they do not affect the encryption of the TGS or the validity of the TGT. References:

EC-Council CEHv12 Courseware Module 11: Hacking Webservers, page 11-24

What is a Kerberoasting Attack? – CrowdStrike

How to Perform Kerberoasting Attacks: The Ultimate Guide - StationX

A DHCP starvation assault is a pernicious computerized assault that objectives DHCP workers. During a DHCP assault, an unfriendly entertainer floods a DHCP worker with false DISCOVER bundles until the DHCP worker debilitates its stock of IP addresses. When that occurs, the aggressor can deny genuine organization clients administration, or even stock an other DHCP association that prompts a Man-in-the-Middle (MITM) assault.

In a DHCP Starvation assault, a threatening entertainer sends a huge load of false DISCOVER parcels until the DHCP worker thinks they’ve used their accessible pool. Customers searching for IP tends to find that there are no IP addresses for them, and they’re refused assistance. Furthermore, they may search for an alternate DHCP worker, one which the unfriendly entertainer may give. What’s more, utilizing a threatening or sham IP address, that unfriendly entertainer would now be able to peruse all the traffic that customer sends and gets.

In an unfriendly climate, where we have a malevolent machine running some sort of an instrument like Yersinia, there could be a machine that sends DHCP DISCOVER bundles. This malevolent customer doesn’t send a modest bunch – it sends a great many vindictive DISCOVER bundles utilizing sham, made-up MAC addresses as the source MAC address for each solicitation.

In the event that the DHCP worker reacts to every one of these false DHCP DISCOVER parcels, the whole IP address pool could be exhausted, and that DHCP worker could trust it has no more IP delivers to bring to the table to legitimate DHCP demands.

When a DHCP worker has no more IP delivers to bring to the table, ordinarily the following thing to happen would be for the aggressor to get their own DHCP worker. This maverick DHCP worker at that point starts giving out IP addresses.

The advantage of that to the assailant is that if a false DHCP worker is distributing IP addresses, including default DNS and door data, customers who utilize those IP delivers and begin to utilize that default passage would now be able to be directed through the aggressor’s machine. That is all that an unfriendly entertainer requires to play out a man-in-the-center (MITM) assault.