Exam CS0-002 topic 1 question 219 discussion

This is the dumbest question I've seen so far . . . Impossible to answer without more context. I assume they are looking for organised crime but who knows what the product is, or what the threats are? If it's Sony releasing a film about North Korea then Nation States. If it's a bank releasing a new banking solution, then organised crime. If it's a Fossil fuel company then Hacktivists. Stupid Stupid question.

Given the specific context of a marketing campaign for a new product, the security analyst's primary focus would depend on various factors like the nature of the product, the markets being targeted, and any geopolitical or social issues that might be involved. However, without additional details, A. Hacktivists might be a reasonable primary focus. Marketing campaigns can often draw public attention, and hacktivists may seek to disrupt or deface the campaign for ideological reasons.

C. Nation-states When an international company is launching a marketing campaign, it may become a target for various threat actors. Nation-states, with their advanced capabilities and resources, are often interested in monitoring or influencing international business activities, especially if they have a strategic interest in the company's industry or products. Therefore, the security analyst's primary focus should be on identifying possible nation-state threat actors who may pose a significant risk to the company's campaign. While other threat actors like hacktivists (A), organized crime (B), and insider threats (D) should not be ignored, nation-states typically have the highest level of sophistication and pose the most significant potential risks in an international context.

An insider threat should be a consideration in a threat-hunting process, especially if the marketing campaign involves sensitive information or if disgruntled employees or contractors might have motivations to disrupt the campaign. Insider threats can potentially exploit their knowledge of the organization's systems, processes, and data to cause harm. So, it would be appropriate to consider insider threats as one of the potential threat actor types to focus on during the threat-hunting process.

According to the official book of CySA+ The Organized crime has played a significant role as a threat actor, with focused attacks typically aimed at financial gain. Ransomware attacks are an increasingly common example of this type of threat from organized crime groups.

While it is important to be aware of other potential threat actors, such as hacktivists, organized crime, or nation-states, the primary focus should be on insider threats, as they pose a more immediate and significant risk to the organization. By identifying potential insider threats and implementing appropriate security controls, the organization can minimize the risk of data breaches, theft of intellectual property, and other security incidents that could harm the business.

Since you don't know anything about the company then what would be the companies biggest issue? Insider Threats

Organized crime is the likeliest-looking answer. It's generally the most prevalent type of threat-actor for public companies, and it's the most plausible here without any further contextual information to indicate any of the other options.

I see nothing to show that the company is in any way affiliated with politics, so Hacktivists is obviously not the answer. I would assume that an international company is relatively successful, so Organized crime makes sense to me

Not sure, but Organized Crime is a bigger concern than Hacktivists in my opinion.

I'm choosing B. There is no reason to believe this company is affiliated with politics. We do know it's an "international company" and a company that can be international is usually big. Big = money. Money = organized crime.

This is such a vague question.... I honestly have no clue

not enough context... comptia... i'll stick with A, assuming that this international company is a pharmaceutical company making a drug related to a very controversial matter...

Why B? Hacktivists are politically motivated and there is nothing about it in question, I'll stay with B, as it's international company