ISC2 Certified Secure Software Lifecycle Professional (CSSLP) Practice Question
During a weekly operations review, a security engineering lead wants to verify whether recent tuning of SIEM correlation rules is effectively decreasing unnecessary alerts that waste analyst time. Which monitoring metric would provide the most direct evidence of success?
False positive rate for security alerts after investigation
Average number of log events ingested per second by the SIEM
Mean Time to Detect (MTTD) for confirmed incidents
Percentage of production servers with current security patches applied
The false positive rate of security alerts measures how many generated alerts are determined to be benign after investigation. A reduction in this rate shows that correlation rules are more accurate and analysts spend less time on non-actionable events. Mean Time to Detect and Mean Time to Respond assess speed, not noise reduction. Patch compliance percentage reflects vulnerability exposure, while raw log ingestion volume says little about the accuracy or usefulness of the alerts produced.
Ask Bash
Bash is our AI bot, trained to help you pass your exam. AI Generated Content may display inaccurate information, always double-check anything important.
What is a false positive rate in the context of SIEM alerts?
Open an interactive chat with Bash
How do SIEM correlation rules help reduce false positive rates?
Open an interactive chat with Bash
Why is false positive reduction more important than metrics like Mean Time to Detect or raw log volume?
Open an interactive chat with Bash
ISC2 Certified Secure Software Lifecycle Professional (CSSLP)