CEH v12 312-50v12 Dumps PDF

SSL/TLS is a protocol that provides encryption and authentication for data in transit between a client and a server. However, SSL/TLS does not provide any protection against data tampering, which is the alteration, deletion, or insertion of data without authorization or proper validation. Data tampering can compromise the integrity and accuracy of the data, and potentially lead to breaches or fraud. To detect and prevent data tampering, you should implement IPsec in addition to SSL/TLS. IPsec is a protocol that provides encryption, authentication, and integrity for data in transit at the network layer. IPsec uses cryptographic mechanisms, such as digital signatures and hash-based message authentication codes (HMACs), to verify the identity of the sender and the receiver, and to ensure that the data has not been modified during transmission. IPsec can also provide replay protection, which prevents an attacker from retransmitting old or duplicate packets. By combining SSL/TLS and IPsec, you can achieve a higher level of security and reliability for your cloud-based application. References:

• EC-Council CEHv12 Courseware Module 18: Cryptography, page 18-20
• EC-Council CEHv12 Courseware Module 19: Cloud Computing, page 19-29
• A comprehensive guide to data tampering
• Tamper Detection

The deep web is the layer of the online cyberspace that consists of web pages and content that are hidden and unindexed.

The hacker’s next step to confirm the XSS vulnerability would be to utilize a script hosted on the application’s domain to test the form. This is because the application’s CSP allows scripts from its own domain, but not from inline or external sources. Therefore, the hacker can try to inject a payload that references a script file on the same domain as the application, such as:

where script.js contains some benign code, such as alert('XSS') or print('XSS'). If the script executes in the browser, then the hacker has confirmed the XSS vulnerability. Otherwise, the CSP has blocked the script and prevented the XSS attack.

The other options are not feasible or effective for the following reasons:

• A. Try to disable the CSP to bypass script restrictions: This option is not feasible because the hacker cannot disable the CSP on the server side, and the browser enforces the CSP on the client side. The hacker would need to modify the browser settings or use a browser extension to disable the CSP, but this would not affect the victim’s browser or the application’s security.
• B. Inject a benign script inline to the form to see if it executes: This option is not effective because the application’s CSP disallows inline scripts, meaning scripts that are embedded in the HTML code. Therefore, the hacker would not be able to inject a script tag or an event handler attribute that contains some code, such as:

 or 

The CSP would block these scripts and prevent the XSS attack.

• D. Load a script from an external domain to test the vulnerability: This option is not effective because the application’s CSP disallows scripts from external domains, meaning scripts that are loaded from a different domain than the application. Therefore, the hacker would not be able to inject a script tag that references a script file on another domain, such as:

The CSP would block these scripts and prevent the XSS attack.

References:

• 1: Content Security Policy (CSP) - HTTP | MDN
• 2: What is Content Security Policy (CSP) | Header Examples | Imperva
• 3: Content-Security-Policy (CSP) Header Quick Reference
• 4: What is cross-site scripting (XSS)? - PortSwigger
• 5: Cross Site Scripting (XSS) | OWASP Foundation
• 6: The Impact of Cross-Site Scripting Vulnerabilities and their Prevention
• 7: XSS Vulnerability 101: Identify and Stop Cross-Site Scripting