Larry, a security professional in an organization, has noticed some abnormalities In the user accounts on a web server. To thwart evolving attacks, he decided to harden the security of the web…

Question

Options

• AEnable unused default user accounts created during the installation of an OS
• BEnable all non-interactive accounts that should exist but do not require interactive login
• CLimit the administrator or root-level access to the minimum number of users
• DRetain all unused modules and application extensions

• A
  3% (1)
• B
  3% (1)
• C
  87% (27)
• D
  6% (2)

Explanation

Explanation

Limiting administrator or root-level access to the minimum number of users (the Principle of Least Privilege) is the correct countermeasure because it reduces the attack surface by ensuring that only essential personnel have elevated permissions, minimizing the risk of unauthorized changes or privilege abuse if an account is compromised.

Why the distractors are wrong:

• Option A is the opposite of best practice - unused default accounts created during OS installation should be disabled, as they are common targets for attackers exploiting known default credentials.
• Option B is incorrect because non-interactive accounts that don't require interactive login should be disabled, not enabled, to prevent them from being exploited as entry points.
• Option D is also the reverse of best practice - unused modules and application extensions should be removed or disabled to reduce vulnerabilities and minimize the attack surface.

Memory Tip

Think "Less is More" for web server security: fewer privileged users = fewer risks, and anything unused (accounts, modules, extensions) should be removed, not retained. If a question asks about hardening, always look for the option that restricts or removes rather than enables or retains.

No community discussion yet for this question.