Which statement about running an aggressive scan with -A on a sensitive network is true?

Which statement about running an aggressive scan with -A on a sensitive network is true?

• A. It is always safe and light on the network.
• B. It reduces detection risk by avoiding logs.
• C. It only performs OS detection.
• D. It is resource-intensive and highly detectable, increasing network load and the chance of triggering security systems.

Answer: (D)

Aggressive scanning with this option brings together several information-gathering techniques at once: OS detection, version detection, NSE script scanning, and traceroute. That broad, multi-faceted approach means you’re sending more probes, running more checks, and analyzing more responses than a lighter scan would. On a sensitive network, that translates to higher CPU and memory usage on your scanning host, more network traffic, and a more noticeable fingerprint for security systems to pick up. Because of all this, it’s both resource-intensive and highly detectable, which raises the chances of triggering intrusion prevention systems, logging alerts, or disrupting services. So, while it can provide a wealth of detail quickly in permissive environments, it’s not safe or light for sensitive networks, and it doesn’t just perform OS detection or avoid logging. For such networks, a quieter, coordinated approach is usually appropriate.

Aggressive scanning with this option brings together several information-gathering techniques at once: OS detection, version detection, NSE script scanning, and traceroute. That broad, multi-faceted approach means you’re sending more probes, running more checks, and analyzing more responses than a lighter scan would. On a sensitive network, that translates to higher CPU and memory usage on your scanning host, more network traffic, and a more noticeable fingerprint for security systems to pick up. Because of all this, it’s both resource-intensive and highly detectable, which raises the chances of triggering intrusion prevention systems, logging alerts, or disrupting services.

So, while it can provide a wealth of detail quickly in permissive environments, it’s not safe or light for sensitive networks, and it doesn’t just perform OS detection or avoid logging. For such networks, a quieter, coordinated approach is usually appropriate.