Pass the ECCouncil CEH v13 312-50v13 Questions and answers with ValidTests

In a session donation attack, the attacker donates their own session ID to the target user. In this

attack, the attacker first obtains a valid session ID by logging into a service and later feeds the same session ID to the target user. This session ID links a target user to the attacker's account page without disclosing any information to the victim. When the target user clicks on the link and enters the details (username, password, payment details, etc.) in a form, the entered

details are linked to the attacker's account. To initiate this attack, the attacker can send their

session ID using techniques such as cross-site cooking, an MITM attack, and session fixation. A

session donation attack involves the following steps.

Lock-in reflects the inability of the client to migrate from one CSP to another or in-house systems owing to the lack of tools, procedures, standard data formats, applications, and service portability. This threat is related to the inappropriate selection of a CSP, incomplete and non-transparent terms of use, lack of standard mechanisms, etc. (P.2884/2868)

Netcat does not support encryption natively. To securely transmit data over the network, the attacker must use a variant like Cryptcat, which adds symmetric encryption to standard netcat functionality.

From CEH v13 Courseware:

Module 8: Sniffing and Secure Communication

CEH v13 Study Guide states:

“Cryptcat is a netcat clone that supports encryption. For secure file transfers or remote shell access, cryptcat is the recommended tool.”

Incorrect Options:

A/B/C: These are invalid or non-existent netcat parameters.

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation:

Fake antivirus (also known as scareware) tricks users into downloading malware disguised as legitimate antivirus software.

The best approach:

Google the product name and URL.

Check reputable forums, antivirus vendors, or security advisories.

Look for phishing warnings or reports of malware.

From CEH v13 Courseware:

Module 7: Social Engineering and Phishing Scams

Module 6: Malware Threats → Rogue Software

The official management decision given by a senior agency official to authorize operation of an information system and to explicitly accept the risk to agency operations (including mission, functions, image, or reputation), agency assets, or individuals, based on the implementation of an agreed-upon set of security controls.

formal declaration by a designated accrediting authority (DAA) or principal accrediting authority (PAA) that an information system is approved to operate at an acceptable level of risk, based on the implementation of an approved set of technical, managerial, and procedural safeguards. See authorization to operate (ATO). Rationale: The Risk Management Framework uses a new term to refer to this concept, and it is called authorization.

Identifies the information resources covered by an accreditation decision, as distinguished from separately accredited information resources that are interconnected or with which information is exchanged via messaging. Synonymous with Security Perimeter.

For the purposes of identifying the Protection Level for confidentiality of a system to be accredited, the system has a conceptual boundary that extends to all intended users of the system, both directly and indirectly connected, who receive output from the system. See authorization boundary. Rationale: The Risk Management Framework uses a new term to refer to the concept of accreditation, and it is called authorization. Extrapolating, the accreditation boundary would then be referred to as the authorization boundary.

Censys is a powerful Internet-wide scanning tool that allows users to:

Discover and analyze devices and services exposed to the public internet

Enumerate connected IoT devices, open ports, software versions

Provide structured and searchable reports for vulnerability analysis

According to CEH v13:

Censys continuously scans the IPv4 address space and maintains up-to-date databases of connected devices and their metadata.

Incorrect Options:

B. Wapiti is a web application vulnerability scanner.

C. NeuVector is a container security solution.

D. Lacework is a cloud workload protection platform, not focused on IoT enumeration.

Reference – CEH v13 Official Courseware:

Module 18: IoT and OT Hacking

Section: “IoT Discovery Tools”

Tool Focus: Censys, Shodan

===========

A Kernel-level rootkit operates at the core of the operating system (OS kernel), enabling the attacker to:

Modify or replace kernel code

Load malicious kernel modules

Hide files, processes, and backdoors at a level that is difficult for standard security tools to detect

According to CEH v13:

Kernel-mode rootkits are highly stealthy and dangerous because they run with the highest privileges.

These rootkits modify system calls and memory structures in the kernel space to conceal malicious activity.

Incorrect Options:

A. User-mode rootkits operate at the application layer and are less stealthy than kernel-level rootkits.

B. Library-level rootkits manipulate standard libraries (like libc) to intercept calls.

D. Hypervisor-level rootkits run beneath the OS (e.g., via virtualization) and are extremely rare and complex.

Reference – CEH v13 Official Courseware:

Module 06: Malware Threats

Section: “Types of Rootkits”

Subsection: “Kernel-Mode Rootkits vs. User-Mode Rootkits”

A counter-based authentication system is based on the HOTP (HMAC-Based One-Time Password) algorithm. It uses a shared secret and a moving counter to generate a one-time password (OTP). Each time the counter is incremented, a new OTP is generated and encrypted using the secret key.

Reference – CEH v13 Official Study Guide:

Module 5: System Hacking

Quote:

“HOTP generates a one-time password using a counter value and a secret key. This is a form of two-factor authentication, and the passwords are encrypted.”

Incorrect Options Explained:

A & B. These describe biometric systems, not counter-based OTPs.

D. Virtual passwords from passphrases are not counter-based systems.

===========

When a NULL scan is sent to a port on a UNIX-based system:

If the port is OPEN: The system does not respond at all.

If the port is CLOSED: The system responds with a RST packet.

This behavior is based on how the TCP stack processes unexpected packets.

From CEH v13 Courseware:

Module 3: Scanning Networks

Topic: Stealth Scanning Techniques → NULL Scan

CEH v13 Official Guide states:

“A NULL scan sends a TCP packet with no flags set. On systems following RFC 793 (like many Unix/Linux), open ports silently drop such packets (no response), while closed ports respond with a TCP RST.”

Incorrect Options:

A–E: Not standard responses for an open port in a NULL scan scenario.

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation:

To identify inconsistencies in secure asset records and confirm that systems meet baseline security standards, vulnerability scanning and checking data items (e.g., configuration settings, software versions) is essential. This helps the analyst discover gaps between expected and actual system states.

From CEH v13 Official Curriculum:

Module 5: Vulnerability Assessment → Security Assessment Techniques

“Automated vulnerability scanners and asset inventories help validate that systems are compliant with security baselines.”

CEH identifies spear-phishing as a targeted, context-rich social engineering method tailored to specific individuals or departments. By incorporating accurate insider details, attackers significantly increase trust and likelihood of disclosure.

Jamming and scrambling are attacks targeting the physical layer of the OSI model, often affecting wireless communication by generating interference to disrupt signal transmission. To mitigate such attacks, one advanced countermeasure is the use of Cognitive Radios.

According to CEH v13 Official Courseware:

Cognitive radios are intelligent radio systems capable of sensing the radio frequency (RF) environment and dynamically adjusting their operating parameters (e.g., frequency, modulation) to avoid interference and jamming.

They enable dynamic spectrum access and help in improving spectrum efficiency and resilience against jamming.

This approach falls under physical-layer security mechanisms.

Incorrect Options:

A. gets and strcpy are unsafe functions vulnerable to buffer overflow, not relevant to DoS protection.

B. Allowing all types of packets increases risk and is not a mitigation.

D. TCP SYN cookies protect against SYN flood attacks and disabling them weakens security.

Reference – CEH v13 Official Courseware:

Module 10: Denial-of-Service (DoS) Attacks

Section: “Defensive Strategies Against Jamming and DoS Attacks”

Subsection: “Physical Layer Countermeasures”

===========

Promiscuous mode is a configuration for a network interface card (NIC) that allows it to pass all network traffic to the CPU for processing, not just the traffic addressed to that NIC. It is commonly used in:

Network sniffing and monitoring

Packet analysis tools like Wireshark

IDS/IPS systems

Reference – CEH v13 Official Study Guide:

Module 8: Sniffing

Quote:

“Promiscuous mode allows a NIC to capture all packets on the network segment, regardless of the destination MAC address.”

Incorrect Options:

A. Multicast mode handles group address traffic, not all frames

C. WEM is not a valid network mode term

D. Port forwarding redirects traffic to specific internal IPs

===========

CHNTPW (Change NT Password) is a Linux-based utility that allows attackers or administrators to:

Reset Windows user account passwords

Unlock disabled or locked user accounts

Remove password protection without knowing the original password

It works by editing the Windows SAM (Security Account Manager) file located in the Windows system directory.

Reference – CEH v13 Official Study Guide:

Module 5: System Hacking

Quote:

“CHNTPW is a tool that can reset or change passwords on Windows systems by directly editing the SAM database. It is commonly run from a Linux LiveCD.”

Incorrect Options:

A. John the Ripper is for cracking passwords, not resetting them directly.

B. SET (Social Engineering Toolkit) is for phishing and payloads, not password resets.

D. Cain & Abel is a password recovery tool for Windows but runs on Windows, not Linux.

===========

A SYN flood attack is a type of denial-of-service (DoS) attack that exploits the TCP handshake process by sending a large number of SYN requests to the target server, without completing the connection. This consumes the connection state tables on the server, preventing it from accepting new connections. The attacker has crafted an automated botnet to simultaneously send ‘s’ SYN packets per second to the server. The server can handle ‘f’ SYN packets per second without any performance issues. If ‘s’ exceeds ‘f’, the network infrastructure begins to show signs of overload. The system’s response time increases exponentially (24k), where ‘k’ represents each additional SYN packet above the ‘f’ limit.

Considering ‘s=500’ and different ‘f’ values, the scenario that is most likely to cause the server to experience overload and significantly increased response times is the one where ‘f=420’. This is because ‘s’ is greater than ‘f’ by 80 packets per second, which means the server cannot handle the incoming traffic and will eventually run out of resources. The response time shoots up (2480 = 281,474,976,710,656 times the normal response time), indicating a system overload.

The other scenarios are less likely or less severe than the one where ‘f=420’. Option A has ‘f=510’, which is greater than ‘s’, so the system stays stable and the response time remains unaffected. Option B has ‘f=495’, which is less than ‘s’ by 5 packets per second, so the response time drastically rises (245 = 32 times the normal response time), indicating a probable system overload, but not as extreme as option D. Option C has ‘f=505’, which is less than ‘s’ by 5 packets per second, so the response time increases but not as drastically (245 = 32 times the normal response time), and the system might still function, albeit slowly. References:

SYN flood DDoS attack | Cloudflare

SYN flood - Wikipedia

What Is a SYN Flood Attack? | F5

What is a SYN flood attack and how to prevent it? | NETSCOUT

Source: https://www.flowmon.com

Flowmon empowers manufacturers and utility companies to ensure the reliability of

their industrial networks confidently to avoid downtime and disruption of service

continuity. This can be achieved by continuous monitoring and anomaly detection so

that malfunctioning devices or security incidents, such as cyber espionage, zero-days, or

malware, can be reported and remedied as quickly as possible.

Verbose failure messages are detailed error messages that reveal too much information about authentication failures. In the described scenario, the web application specifies whether the username or password is incorrect. This behavior enables attackers to:

Enumerate valid usernames by submitting random inputs and observing which error message is returned.

Use the valid usernames to conduct targeted attacks such as brute-force attempts or social engineering.

According to CEH v13:

Authentication mechanisms should provide generic error messages such as “Invalid username or password” to avoid exposing system behavior.

Verbose error messages violate the principle of "fail securely."

Incorrect Options:

A. Insecure transmission relates to credentials being sent over unencrypted channels (e.g., HTTP instead of HTTPS).

C. User impersonation involves taking on the identity of another user, not enumeration.

D. Password reset mechanisms are a different component of authentication, not mentioned in this context.

Reference – CEH v13 Official Courseware:

Module 14: Hacking Web Applications

Section: “Authentication Bypass Techniques”

Subsection: “Enumeration via Verbose Error Messages”

===========

One may append the comment “–” operator along with the String for the username and whole avoid executing the password segment of the SQL query. Everything when the — operator would be considered as comment and not dead.

To launch such an attack, the value passed for name could be ’OR ‘1’=‘1’ ; —

Statement = “SELECT * FROM ‘CustomerDB’ WHERE ‘name’ = ‘ ”+ userName + “ ‘ AND ‘password’ = ‘ ” + passwd + “ ‘ ; ”

Statement = “SELECT * FROM ‘CustomerDB’ WHERE ‘name’ = ‘ ’ OR ‘1’=‘1‘;– + “ ‘ AND ‘password’ = ‘ ” + passwd + “ ‘ ; ”

All the records from the customer database would be listed.

Yet, another variation of the SQL Injection Attack can be conducted in dbms systems that allow multiple SQL injection statements. Here, we will also create use of the vulnerability in sure dbms whereby a user provided field isn’t strongly used in or isn’t checked for sort constraints.

This could take place once a numeric field is to be employed in a SQL statement; but, the programmer makes no checks to validate that the user supplied input is numeric.

Variation is an evasion technique whereby the attacker can easily evade any comparison statement. The attacker does this by placing characters such as “' or '1'='1'” in any basic injection statement such as “or 1=1” or with other accepted SQL comments.

Evasion Technique: Variation Variation is an evasion technique whereby the attacker can easily evade any comparison statement. The attacker does this by placing characters such as “' or '1'='1'” in any basic injection statement such as “or 1=1” or with other accepted SQL comments. The SQL interprets this as a comparison between two strings or characters instead of two numeric values. As the evaluation of two strings yields a true statement, similarly, the evaluation of two numeric values yields a true statement, thus rendering the evaluation of the complete query unaffected. It is also possible to write many other signatures; thus, there are infinite possibilities of variation as well. The main aim of the attacker is to have a WHERE statement that is always evaluated as “true” so that any mathematical or string comparison can be used, where the SQL can perform the same.

Passwords are usually delineated as “hashed and salted”. salting is simply the addition of a unique, random string of characters renowned solely to the site to every parole before it’s hashed, typically this “salt” is placed in front of each password.

The salt value needs to be hold on by the site, which means typically sites use the same salt for each parole. This makes it less effective than if individual salts are used.

The use of unique salts means that common passwords shared by multiple users – like “123456” or “password” – aren’t revealed revealed when one such hashed password is known – because despite the passwords being the same the immediately and hashed values are not.

Large salts also protect against certain methods of attack on hashes, including rainbow tables or logs of hashed passwords previously broken.

Both hashing and salting may be repeated more than once to increase the issue in breaking the security.

A brute-force attack is the most exhaustive password-cracking method. It tries every possible combination of characters (letters, numbers, and symbols) until the correct password is found.

From CEH v13 Courseware:

Module 6: Password Cracking Techniques

CEH v13 Study Guide states:

“Brute-force attacks try every possible combination until the correct password is discovered. It’s resource-intensive but guarantees success if enough time and processing power is available.”

Incorrect Options:

B: Refers to social engineering or coercion.

C: Describes a dictionary attack.

D: Refers to a rainbow table attack.

E: Not a cracking method.