A company wants to prevent unauthorized employees from connecting personal laptops to the corporate Wi-Fi network. They currently use WPA2-PSK with a shared passphrase. Which solution would most effectively enforce per-user access control?

Change the WPA2-PSK passphrase monthly

Enable MAC filtering on the access points

Deploy WPA2-Enterprise with 802.1X authentication using RADIUS

A security architect is designing a wireless network for a financial institution. The network must support WPA3 for new devices but also needs to support legacy IoT devices that only support WPA2. The architect is concerned about the security of the legacy devices. Which approach provides the best balance of security and compatibility?

Place legacy WPA2 devices on a separate VLAN with restricted access to internal resources

Use WPA3/WPA2 mixed mode on the same SSID for all devices

Upgrade all legacy devices to support WPA3

Use WPA2-PSK for all devices to ensure compatibility

A company wants to detect rogue access points in their office. They have deployed wireless intrusion prevention systems (WIPS). Which additional measure would be most effective in detecting rogue APs?

Conduct periodic site surveys to identify unauthorized devices

Disable all unused ports on switches

Use MAC filtering on the wireless network

A company allows employees to connect personal devices to a guest Wi-Fi network. The security team wants to prevent guests from accessing internal resources while still allowing internet access. Which configuration is the most appropriate?

Place the guest network on a separate VLAN with a firewall rule blocking access to internal subnets

Enable MAC address filtering to allow only known devices

Use WPA2-PSK with a strong passphrase and share it with guests

Disable SSID broadcast to hide the guest network

Which countermeasure is most effective in preventing an evil twin attack?

Enabling MAC address filtering on the access point

Using WPA3-Enterprise with 802.1X and certificates

Using WPA2 with a strong pre-shared key

EC-CouncilCertified Ethical Hacker

Domain 6Objective 1

Wireless Encryption and Threats CEH Practice Questions (Page 7)

Part of the Wireless Network Hacking domain, which makes up ~8% of our current practice bank. EC-Council does not publish an official question count, but from its 240-minute exam (~95–160 total, ~8–13 in this domain), expect 2–3 from this objective — we provide 40 practice questions to prepare you well beyond it. (estimate)

40questions here

8free pages

5concepts

Questions 31–35

31application · medium
A company wants to prevent unauthorized employees from connecting personal laptops to the corporate Wi-Fi network. They currently use WPA2-PSK with a shared passphrase. Which solution would most effectively enforce per-user access control?
Select an answer first
32expert · hard
A security architect is designing a wireless network for a financial institution. The network must support WPA3 for new devices but also needs to support legacy IoT devices that only support WPA2. The architect is concerned about the security of the legacy devices. Which approach provides the best balance of security and compatibility?
Select an answer first
33application · medium
A company wants to detect rogue access points in their office. They have deployed wireless intrusion prevention systems (WIPS). Which additional measure would be most effective in detecting rogue APs?
Select an answer first
34application · medium
A company allows employees to connect personal devices to a guest Wi-Fi network. The security team wants to prevent guests from accessing internal resources while still allowing internet access. Which configuration is the most appropriate?
Select an answer first
35foundation · easy
Which countermeasure is most effective in preventing an evil twin attack?
Select an answer first

Finished these 5 questions?

Review the revealed explanations, or continue through the curriculum.

Next 5 questions →Back to CEH

Free Basic Practice is a study aid with revealable answers — not a scored exam. Examers.io is independent and not affiliated with or endorsed by EC-Council. “CEH” is a trademark of its owner, used for identification only.