Explanation
Threat hunting is the process of proactively searching for signs of malicious activity or compromise in a network, rather than waiting for alerts or indicators of compromise (IOCs) to appear. Threat hunting can help identify new tactics, techniques, and procedures (TTPs) used by malicious actors, as well as uncover hidden or stealthy threats that may have evaded detection by security tools. Threat hunting requires a combination of skills, tools, and methodologies, such as hypothesis generation, data collection and analysis, threat intelligence, and incident response. Threat hunting can also help improve the security posture of an organization by providing feedback and recommendations for security improvements. References = CompTIA Security+ Certification Exam Objectives, Domain 4.1: Given a scenario, analyze potential indicators of malicious activity. CompTIA Security+ Study Guide (SY0-701), Chapter 4: Threat Detection and Response, page 153. Threat Hunting - SY0-701 CompTIA Security+ : 4.1, Video 3:18. CompTIA Security+ Certification Exam SY0-701 Practice Test 1, Question 3.

Explanation
Capacity planning is the process of determining the resources needed to meet the current and future demands of an organization. Capacity planning can help a company develop a business continuity strategy by estimating how many staff members would be required to sustain the business in the case of a disruption, such as a natural disaster, a cyberattack, or a pandemic. Capacity planning can also help a company optimize the use of its resources, reduce costs, and improve performance. References = CompTIA Security+ Study Guide with over 500 Practice Test Questions: Exam SY0-701, 9th Edition, Chapter 4, page 184. CompTIA Security+ (SY0-701) Certification Exam Objectives, Domain 4.1, page 14. Business Continuity - SY0-601 CompTIA Security+ : 4.1

Explanation
After completing a vulnerability assessment and remediating the identified vulnerabilities, the next step is to rescan the network to verify that the vulnerabilities have been successfully fixed and no new vulnerabilities have been introduced. A vulnerability assessment is a process of identifying and evaluating the weaknesses and exposures in a network, system, or application that could be exploited by attackers. A vulnerability assessment typically involves using automated tools, such as scanners, to scan the network and generate a report of the findings. The report may include information such as the severity, impact, and remediation of the vulnerabilities. The operations team is responsible for applying the appropriate patches, updates, or configurations to address the vulnerabilities and reduce the risk to the network. A rescan is necessary to confirm that the remediation actions have been effective and that the network is secure.
Conducting an audit, initiating a penetration test, or submitting a report are not the next steps after completing a vulnerability assessment and remediating the vulnerabilities. An audit is a process of reviewing and verifying the compliance of the network with the established policies, standards, and regulations. An audit may be performed by internal or external auditors, and it may use the results of the vulnerability assessment as part of the evidence. However, an audit is not a mandatory step after a vulnerability assessment, and it does not validate the effectiveness of the remediation actions.
A penetration test is a process of simulating a real-world attack on the network to test the security defenses and identify any gaps or weaknesses. A penetration test may use the results of the vulnerability assessment as a starting point, but it goes beyond scanning and involves exploiting the vulnerabilities to gain access or cause damage. A penetration test may be performed after a vulnerability assessment, but only with the proper authorization, scope, and rules of engagement. A penetration test is not a substitute for a rescan, as it does not verify that the vulnerabilities have been fixed.
Submitting a report is a step that is done after the vulnerability assessment, but before the remediation. The report is a document that summarizes the findings and recommendations of the vulnerability assessment, and it is used to communicate the results to the stakeholders and the operations team. The report may also include a follow-up plan and a timeline for the remediation actions. However, submitting a report is not the final step after the remediation, as it does not confirm that the network is secure.
References = CompTIA Security+ SY0-701 Certification Study Guide, page 372-375; Professor Messer's CompTIA SY0-701 Security+ Training Course, video 4.1 - Vulnerability Scanning, 0:00 - 8:00.

Explanation
PCI DSS is the Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard, which is a set of security requirements for organizations that store, process, or transmit cardholder data. PCI DSS aims to protect the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of cardholder data and prevent fraud, identity theft, and data breaches. PCI DSS is enforced by the payment card brands, such as Visa, Mastercard, American Express, Discover, and JCB, and applies to all entities involved in the payment card ecosystem, such as merchants, acquirers, issuers, processors, service providers, and payment applications.
If a large bank fails an internal PCI DSS compliance assessment, the most likely outcome is that the bank will face fines from the payment card brands. An internal PCI DSS compliance assessment is a self-assessment that the bank performs to evaluate its own compliance with the PCI DSS requirements. The bank must submit the results of the internal assessment to the payment card brands or their designated agents, such as acquirers or qualified security assessors (QSAs). If the internal assessment reveals that the bank is not compliant with the PCI DSS requirements, the payment card brands may impose fines on the bank as a penalty for violating the PCI DSS contract. The amount and frequency of the fines may vary depending on the severity and duration of the non-compliance, the number and type of cardholder data compromised, and the level of cooperation and remediation from the bank. The fines can range from thousands to millions of dollars per month, and can increase over time if the non-compliance is not resolved.
The other options are not correct because they are not the most likely outcomes if a large bank fails an internal PCI DSS compliance assessment. B. Audit findings. Audit findings are the results of an external PCI DSS compliance assessment that is performed by a QSA or an approved scanning vendor (ASV). An external assessment is required for certain entities that handle a large volume of cardholder data or have a history of non-compliance. An external assessment may also be triggered by a security incident or a request from the payment card brands. Audit findings may reveal the gaps and weaknesses in the bank's security controls and recommend corrective actions to achieve compliance. However, audit findings are not the outcome of an internal assessment, which is performed by the bank itself. C. Sanctions. Sanctions are the measures that the payment card brands may take against the bank if the bank fails to pay the fines or comply with the PCI DSS requirements. Sanctions may include increasing the fines, suspending or terminating the bank's ability to accept or process payment cards, or revoking the bank's PCI DSS certification. Sanctions are not the immediate outcome of an internal assessment, but rather the possible consequence of prolonged or repeated non-compliance. D. Reputation damage. Reputation damage is the loss of trust and credibility that the bank may suffer from its customers, partners, regulators, and the public if the bank fails an internal PCI DSS compliance assessment. Reputation damage may affect the bank's brand image, customer loyalty, market share, and profitability. Reputation damage is not a direct outcome of an internal assessment, but rather a potential risk that the bank may face if the non-compliance is exposed or exploited by malicious actors. References = CompTIA Security+ Study Guide (SY0-701), Chapter 8: Governance, Risk, and Compliance, page 388. Professor Messer's CompTIA SY0-701 Security+ Training Course, Section 8.2:
Compliance and Controls, video: PCI DSS (5:12). PCI Security Standards Council, PCI DSS Quick Reference Guide, page 4. PCI Security Standards Council, PCI DSS FAQs, question 8. PCI Security Standards Council, PCI DSS FAQs, question 9. [PCI Security Standards Council], PCI DSS FAQs, question 10. [PCI Security Standards Council], PCI DSS FAQs, question 11. [PCI Security Standards Council], PCI DSS FAQs, question
12. [PCI Security Standards Council], PCI DSS FAQs, question 13. [PCI Security Standards Council], PCI DSS FAQs, question 14. [PCI Security Standards Council], PCI DSS FAQs, question 15. [PCI Security Standards Council], PCI DSS FAQs, question 16. [PCI Security Standards Council], PCI DSS FAQs, question
17. [PCI Security Standards Council], PCI DSS FAQs, question 18. [PCI Security Standards Council], PCI DSS FAQs, question 19. [PCI Security Standards Council], PCI DSS FAQs, question 20. [PCI Security Standards Council], PCI DSS FAQs, question 21. [PCI Security Standards Council], PCI DSS FAQs, question
22. [PCI Security Standards Council], PCI DSS FAQs, question 23. [PCI Security Standards Council], PCI DSS FAQs, question 24. [PCI Security Standards Council], PCI DSS FAQs, question 25. [PCI Security Standards Council], PCI DSS FAQs, question 26. [PCI Security Standards Council], PCI DSS FAQs, question
27. [PCI Security Standards Council], PCI DSS FAQs, question 28. [PCI Security Standards Council], PCI DSS FAQs, question 29. [PCI Security Standards Council], PCI DSS FAQs, question 30. [PCI Security Standards Council]

Explanation
An acceptable use policy (AUP) is a set of rules that govern how users can access and use a corporate network or the internet. The AUP helps companies minimize their exposure to cyber security threats and limit other risks. The AUP also serves as a notice to users about what they are not allowed to do and protects the company against misuse of their network. Users usually have to acknowledge that they understand and agree to the rules before accessing the network1.
An AUP best represents a preventive security control type, because it aims to deter or stop potential security incidents from occurring in the first place. A preventive control is proactive and anticipates possible threats and vulnerabilities, and implements measures to prevent them from exploiting or harming the system or the data. A preventive control can be physical, technical, or administrative in nature2.
Some examples of preventive controls are:
Locks, fences, or guards that prevent unauthorized physical access to a facility or a device Firewalls, antivirus software, or encryption that prevent unauthorized logical access to a network or a system Policies, procedures, or training that prevent unauthorized or inappropriate actions or behaviors by users or employees An AUP is an example of an administrative preventive control, because it defines the policies and procedures that users must follow to ensure the security and proper use of the network and the IT resources. An AUP can prevent users from engaging in activities that could compromise the security, performance, or availability of the network or the system, such as:
Downloading or installing unauthorized or malicious software
Accessing or sharing sensitive or confidential information without authorization or encryption Using the network or the system for personal, illegal, or unethical purposes Bypassing or disabling security controls or mechanisms Connecting unsecured or unapproved devices to the network By enforcing an AUP, a company can prevent or reduce the likelihood of security breaches, data loss, legal liability, or reputational damage caused by user actions or inactions3.
References = 1: How to Create an Acceptable Use Policy - CoreTech, 2: [Security Control Types: Preventive, Detective, Corrective, and Compensating], 3: Why You Need A Corporate Acceptable Use Policy - CompTIA