Explanation: The Seller’s Disclosure Form is primarily intended to disclose any known defects or issues with the property to the potential buyer. This helps ensure transparency and allows buyers to make informed decisions about the property. Failure to disclose known defects could lead to legal issues for the seller and potential financial losses for the buyer. Options a, c, and d are not the primary purposes of the Seller’s Disclosure Form and are incorrect.

Explanation: Analyzing network traffic patterns is a commonly used technique for threat detection in a Sourcefire IPS deployment. By monitoring and analyzing the behavior of network traffic, the IPS can identify anomalous activities, suspicious patterns, and potential security threats. This technique enables proactive threat detection and helps organizations respond to security incidents in a timely manner. Options a, c, and d describe actions that are either ineffective or counterproductive for threat detection and are incorrect.

Explanation: Event correlation in a Sourcefire IPS deployment involves identifying patterns and relationships between security events to detect sophisticated attacks and coordinated campaigns. By correlating multiple security events from various sources, such as IPS alerts, firewall logs, and system logs, the IPS can distinguish between isolated incidents and coordinated attacks, prioritize response efforts, and mitigate security risks effectively. Event correlation enhances situational awareness, facilitates incident response, and strengthens overall security posture. Options a, b, and d describe roles or functions that are not directly related to event correlation in the context of Sourcefire IPS deployment and are incorrect.

Explanation: Reporting and documentation in a Sourcefire IPS deployment serve the purpose of demonstrating compliance with industry standards and regulatory requirements. Reports provide insights into security events, alerts, and incidents detected by the IPS, allowing organizations to assess their security posture and identify areas for improvement. Moreover, reporting and documentation demonstrate adherence to compliance requirements such as PCI DSS, HIPAA, and GDPR. By generating reports, organizations can communicate their security efforts, achievements, and challenges to stakeholders, auditors, and regulatory bodies, showcasing a commitment to protecting sensitive information and maintaining regulatory compliance. Options a, b, and d describe purposes or functions that are not directly related to reporting and documentation in a Sourcefire IPS deployment and are incorrect.

Explanation: Based on best practices, Mr. Johnson’s immediate response to the alert from the Sourcefire IPS should be to investigate further to determine the nature and scope of the security incident. This involves analyzing the alert details, examining associated network traffic, and conducting forensic analysis to identify the root cause and impact of the potential security threat. Investigating the alert enables Mr. Johnson to assess the severity of the incident, prioritize response actions, and implement measures to contain and mitigate the threat effectively. Ignoring the alert or taking immediate actions without proper investigation may lead to missed detections or inappropriate responses, potentially exacerbating security risks. Options b, c, and d describe actions that are either premature, ineffective, or counterproductive in responding to security alerts and are incorrect.

Explanation: Event correlation and analysis provide several benefits in a Sourcefire IPS deployment, including improved identification of patterns and relationships between security events. By correlating multiple security events from various sources, such as IPS alerts, firewall logs, and system logs, security analysts can detect coordinated attacks, identify attack vectors, and understand the scope and impact of security incidents more comprehensively. Event correlation enables analysts to distinguish between isolated incidents and coordinated campaigns, prioritize response efforts, and allocate resources effectively to mitigate security risks. Options a, b, and d describe outcomes or functions that are not directly related to event correlation and analysis in the context of Sourcefire IPS and are incorrect.

Explanation: The purpose of tuning and optimization of IPS rules in a Sourcefire IPS deployment is to customize the ruleset to better match the organization’s security needs. This involves fine-tuning the IPS rules to reduce false positives, improve detection accuracy, and enhance overall effectiveness in identifying and mitigating security threats. By optimizing IPS rules, organizations can prioritize critical alerts, minimize unnecessary noise, and ensure that the IPS is tailored to address specific security risks and compliance requirements. Default policies may not adequately address the organization’s unique security needs and may result in either overly restrictive or ineffective security posture. Options a, b, and d describe outcomes or actions that are not aligned with the purpose of tuning and optimization of IPS rules and are incorrect.

Explanation: Integration with Cisco network devices in a Sourcefire IPS deployment enhances visibility and control over network traffic. By integrating with Cisco routers, switches, and firewalls, the IPS gains deeper insights into network traffic patterns and can enforce security policies more effectively. Integration facilitates seamless communication between security components, enabling organizations to correlate events, share threat intelligence, and automate response actions across the network. This holistic approach enhances situational awareness, simplifies security management, and strengthens overall network security posture. Options a, b, and d describe misconceptions or incorrect roles of integration with Cisco network devices in a Sourcefire IPS deployment and are inaccurate.

Explanation: Reporting and documentation in a Sourcefire IPS deployment serve the purpose of demonstrating compliance with industry standards and regulatory requirements. Reports provide insights into security events, alerts, and incidents detected by the IPS, allowing organizations to assess their security posture and identify areas for improvement. Moreover, reporting and documentation demonstrate adherence to compliance requirements such as PCI DSS, HIPAA, and GDPR. By generating reports, organizations can communicate their security efforts, achievements, and challenges to stakeholders, auditors, and regulatory bodies, showcasing a commitment to protecting sensitive information and maintaining regulatory compliance. Options a, b, and d describe purposes or functions that are not directly related to reporting and documentation in a Sourcefire IPS deployment and are incorrect.

Explanation: Based on best practices, Mr. Lewis’s immediate response to the alert from the Sourcefire IPS should be to investigate further to determine the nature and scope of the security incident. This involves analyzing the alert details, examining associated network traffic, and conducting forensic analysis to identify the root cause and impact of the potential security threat. Investigating the alert enables Mr. Lewis to assess the severity of the incident, prioritize response actions, and implement measures to contain and mitigate the threat effectively. Ignoring the alert or taking immediate actions without proper investigation may lead to missed detections or inappropriate responses, potentially exacerbating security risks. Options b, c, and d describe actions that are either premature, ineffective, or counterproductive in responding to security alerts and are incorrect.

Explanation: The Seller’s Disclosure Form is primarily intended to disclose any known defects or issues with the property to the potential buyer. This helps ensure transparency and allows buyers to make informed decisions about the property. Failure to disclose known defects could lead to legal issues for the seller and potential financial losses for the buyer. Options a, c, and d are not the primary purposes of the Seller’s Disclosure Form and are incorrect.

Explanation: Analyzing network traffic patterns is a commonly used technique for threat detection in a Sourcefire IPS deployment. By monitoring and analyzing the behavior of network traffic, the IPS can identify anomalous activities, suspicious patterns, and potential security threats. This technique enables proactive threat detection and helps organizations respond to security incidents in a timely manner. Options a, c, and d describe actions that are either ineffective or counterproductive for threat detection and are incorrect.

Explanation: Event correlation in a Sourcefire IPS deployment involves identifying patterns and relationships between security events to detect sophisticated attacks and coordinated campaigns. By correlating multiple security events from various sources, such as IPS alerts, firewall logs, and system logs, the IPS can distinguish between isolated incidents and coordinated attacks, prioritize response efforts, and mitigate security risks effectively. Event correlation enhances situational awareness, facilitates incident response, and strengthens overall security posture. Options a, b, and d describe roles or functions that are not directly related to event correlation in the context of Sourcefire IPS deployment and are incorrect.

Explanation: Reporting and documentation in a Sourcefire IPS deployment serve the purpose of demonstrating compliance with industry standards and regulatory requirements. Reports provide insights into security events, alerts, and incidents detected by the IPS, allowing organizations to assess their security posture and identify areas for improvement. Moreover, reporting and documentation demonstrate adherence to compliance requirements such as PCI DSS, HIPAA, and GDPR. By generating reports, organizations can communicate their security efforts, achievements, and challenges to stakeholders, auditors, and regulatory bodies, showcasing a commitment to protecting sensitive information and maintaining regulatory compliance. Options a, b, and d describe purposes or functions that are not directly related to reporting and documentation in a Sourcefire IPS deployment and are incorrect.

Explanation: Based on best practices, Mr. Johnson’s immediate response to the alert from the Sourcefire IPS should be to investigate further to determine the nature and scope of the security incident. This involves analyzing the alert details, examining associated network traffic, and conducting forensic analysis to identify the root cause and impact of the potential security threat. Investigating the alert enables Mr. Johnson to assess the severity of the incident, prioritize response actions, and implement measures to contain and mitigate the threat effectively. Ignoring the alert or taking immediate actions without proper investigation may lead to missed detections or inappropriate responses, potentially exacerbating security risks. Options b, c, and d describe actions that are either premature, ineffective, or counterproductive in responding to security alerts and are incorrect.

Explanation: Event correlation and analysis provide several benefits in a Sourcefire IPS deployment, including improved identification of patterns and relationships between security events. By correlating multiple security events from various sources, such as IPS alerts, firewall logs, and system logs, security analysts can detect coordinated attacks, identify attack vectors, and understand the scope and impact of security incidents more comprehensively. Event correlation enables analysts to distinguish between isolated incidents and coordinated campaigns, prioritize response efforts, and allocate resources effectively to mitigate security risks. Options a, b, and d describe outcomes or functions that are not directly related to event correlation and analysis in the context of Sourcefire IPS and are incorrect.

Explanation: The purpose of tuning and optimization of IPS rules in a Sourcefire IPS deployment is to customize the ruleset to better match the organization’s security needs. This involves fine-tuning the IPS rules to reduce false positives, improve detection accuracy, and enhance overall effectiveness in identifying and mitigating security threats. By optimizing IPS rules, organizations can prioritize critical alerts, minimize unnecessary noise, and ensure that the IPS is tailored to address specific security risks and compliance requirements. Default policies may not adequately address the organization’s unique security needs and may result in either overly restrictive or ineffective security posture. Options a, b, and d describe outcomes or actions that are not aligned with the purpose of tuning and optimization of IPS rules and are incorrect.

Explanation: Integration with Cisco network devices in a Sourcefire IPS deployment enhances visibility and control over network traffic. By integrating with Cisco routers, switches, and firewalls, the IPS gains deeper insights into network traffic patterns and can enforce security policies more effectively. Integration facilitates seamless communication between security components, enabling organizations to correlate events, share threat intelligence, and automate response actions across the network. This holistic approach enhances situational awareness, simplifies security management, and strengthens overall network security posture. Options a, b, and d describe misconceptions or incorrect roles of integration with Cisco network devices in a Sourcefire IPS deployment and are inaccurate.

Explanation: Reporting and documentation in a Sourcefire IPS deployment serve the purpose of demonstrating compliance with industry standards and regulatory requirements. Reports provide insights into security events, alerts, and incidents detected by the IPS, allowing organizations to assess their security posture and identify areas for improvement. Moreover, reporting and documentation demonstrate adherence to compliance requirements such as PCI DSS, HIPAA, and GDPR. By generating reports, organizations can communicate their security efforts, achievements, and challenges to stakeholders, auditors, and regulatory bodies, showcasing a commitment to protecting sensitive information and maintaining regulatory compliance. Options a, b, and d describe purposes or functions that are not directly related to reporting and documentation in a Sourcefire IPS deployment and are incorrect.

Explanation: Based on best practices, Mr. Lewis’s immediate response to the alert from the Sourcefire IPS should be to investigate further to determine the nature and scope of the security incident. This involves analyzing the alert details, examining associated network traffic, and conducting forensic analysis to identify the root cause and impact of the potential security threat. Investigating the alert enables Mr. Lewis to assess the severity of the incident, prioritize response actions, and implement measures to contain and mitigate the threat effectively. Ignoring the alert or taking immediate actions without proper investigation may lead to missed detections or inappropriate responses, potentially exacerbating security risks. Options b, c, and d describe actions that are either premature, ineffective, or counterproductive in responding to security alerts and are incorrect.

Explanation: The primary purpose of the Seller’s Disclosure Form is to disclose any known defects or issues with the property to the potential buyer. This helps ensure transparency and allows buyers to make informed decisions about the property. Failure to disclose known defects could lead to legal issues for the seller and potential financial losses for the buyer. Options a, c, and d are not the primary purposes of the Seller’s Disclosure Form and are incorrect.

Explanation: Analyzing network traffic patterns is a commonly used technique for threat detection in a Sourcefire IPS deployment. By monitoring and analyzing the behavior of network traffic, the IPS can identify anomalous activities, suspicious patterns, and potential security threats. This technique enables proactive threat detection and helps organizations respond to security incidents in a timely manner. Options a, c, and d describe actions that are either ineffective or counterproductive for threat detection and are incorrect.

Explanation: Event correlation in a Sourcefire IPS deployment involves identifying patterns and relationships between security events to detect sophisticated attacks and coordinated campaigns. By correlating multiple security events from various sources, such as IPS alerts, firewall logs, and system logs, the IPS can distinguish between isolated incidents and coordinated attacks, prioritize response efforts, and mitigate security risks effectively. Event correlation enhances situational awareness, facilitates incident response, and strengthens overall security posture. Options a, b, and d describe roles or functions that are not directly related to event correlation in the context of Sourcefire IPS deployment and are incorrect.

Explanation: Reporting and documentation in a Sourcefire IPS deployment serve the purpose of demonstrating compliance with industry standards and regulatory requirements. Reports provide insights into security events, alerts, and incidents detected by the IPS, allowing organizations to assess their security posture and identify areas for improvement. Moreover, reporting and documentation demonstrate adherence to compliance requirements such as PCI DSS, HIPAA, and GDPR. By generating reports, organizations can communicate their security efforts, achievements, and challenges to stakeholders, auditors, and regulatory bodies, showcasing a commitment to protecting sensitive information and maintaining regulatory compliance. Options a, b, and d describe purposes or functions that are not directly related to reporting and documentation in a Sourcefire IPS deployment and are incorrect.

Explanation: Based on best practices, Mr. Johnson’s immediate response to the alert from the Sourcefire IPS should be to investigate further to determine the nature and scope of the security incident. This involves analyzing the alert details, examining associated network traffic, and conducting forensic analysis to identify the root cause and impact of the potential security threat. Investigating the alert enables Mr. Johnson to assess the severity of the incident, prioritize response actions, and implement measures to contain and mitigate the threat effectively. Ignoring the alert or taking immediate actions without proper investigation may lead to missed detections or inappropriate responses, potentially exacerbating security risks. Options b, c, and d describe actions that are either premature, ineffective, or counterproductive in responding to security alerts and are incorrect.

Explanation: Event correlation and analysis provide several benefits in a Sourcefire IPS deployment, including improved identification of patterns and relationships between security events. By correlating multiple security events from various sources, such as IPS alerts, firewall logs, and system logs, security analysts can detect coordinated attacks, identify attack vectors, and understand the scope and impact of security incidents more comprehensively. Event correlation enables analysts to distinguish between isolated incidents and coordinated campaigns, prioritize response efforts, and allocate resources effectively to mitigate security risks. Options a, b, and d describe outcomes or functions that are not directly related to event correlation and analysis in the context of Sourcefire IPS and are incorrect.

Explanation: The purpose of tuning and optimization of IPS rules in a Sourcefire IPS deployment is to customize the ruleset to better match the organization’s security needs. This involves fine-tuning the IPS rules to reduce false positives, improve detection accuracy, and enhance overall effectiveness in identifying and mitigating security threats. By optimizing IPS rules, organizations can prioritize critical alerts, minimize unnecessary noise, and ensure that the IPS is tailored to address specific security risks and compliance requirements. Default policies may not adequately address the organization’s unique security needs and may result in either overly restrictive or ineffective security posture. Options a, b, and d describe outcomes or actions that are not aligned with the purpose of tuning and optimization of IPS rules and are incorrect.

Explanation: Integration with Cisco network devices in a Sourcefire IPS deployment enhances visibility and control over network traffic. By integrating with Cisco routers, switches, and firewalls, the IPS gains deeper insights into network traffic patterns and can enforce security policies more effectively. Integration facilitates seamless communication between security components, enabling organizations to correlate events, share threat intelligence, and automate response actions across the network. This holistic approach enhances situational awareness, simplifies security management, and strengthens overall network security posture. Options a, b, and d describe misconceptions or incorrect roles of integration with Cisco network devices in a Sourcefire IPS deployment and are inaccurate.

Explanation: Reporting and documentation in a Sourcefire IPS deployment serve the purpose of demonstrating compliance with industry standards and regulatory requirements. Reports provide insights into security events, alerts, and incidents detected by the IPS, allowing organizations to assess their security posture and identify areas for improvement. Moreover, reporting and documentation demonstrate adherence to compliance requirements such as PCI DSS, HIPAA, and GDPR. By generating reports, organizations can communicate their security efforts, achievements, and challenges to stakeholders, auditors, and regulatory bodies, showcasing a commitment to protecting sensitive information and maintaining regulatory compliance. Options a, b, and d describe purposes or functions that are not directly related to reporting and documentation in a Sourcefire IPS deployment and are incorrect.

Explanation: Based on best practices, Mr. Lewis’s immediate response to the alert from the Sourcefire IPS should be to investigate further to determine the nature and scope of the security incident. This involves analyzing the alert details, examining associated network traffic, and conducting forensic analysis to identify the root cause and impact of the potential security threat. Investigating the alert enables Mr. Lewis to assess the severity of the incident, prioritize response actions, and implement measures to contain and mitigate the threat effectively. Ignoring the alert or taking immediate actions without proper investigation may lead to missed detections or inappropriate responses, potentially exacerbating security risks. Options b, c, and d describe actions that are either premature, ineffective, or counterproductive in responding to security alerts and are incorrect.