Which of the following descriptions about HTTP Flood defense is incorrect?

Question

Options

• AIf the free proxy used during the attack supports the redirection function, the basic mode defense
• BThe source authentication defense method is to defend against HTTP
• CDefense based on enhanced mode can determine whether the TTP access is initiated by a real
• DDefense based on basic mode cannot effectively prevent access from non-browser clients

• A
  10% (3)
• B
  3% (1)
• C
  7% (2)
• D
  80% (24)

Explanation

Option D is the incorrect description because basic mode defense actually is effective against non-browser clients - that's its core strength. Basic mode works by issuing HTTP redirects or cookie challenges that legitimate browsers handle automatically, but simple HTTP flood bots and scripts (non-browser clients) typically cannot complete, causing them to be blocked.

Why the distractors (A, B, C) are correct statements - and thus wrong answers to this question:

• A is correct: If an attacker's free proxy can follow HTTP redirects, it can bypass basic mode's redirect-based challenge, making this a real known weakness.
• B is correct: Source authentication (verifying the legitimacy of the request source via challenges) is indeed a recognized HTTP flood defense method.
• C is correct: Enhanced mode uses more sophisticated checks (e.g., JavaScript execution, multi-stage cookie validation) that genuinely distinguish real browser sessions from automated traffic.

Memory tip: Flip D in your mind - "Basic mode BLOCKS non-browsers, not the reverse." Think of it as a simple gatekeeper: real browsers pass the redirect test, bots fail it. Enhanced mode just raises the bar higher for more advanced bots.

No community discussion yet for this question.