🚧 Under construction — VoTechWorks is being built. A free tech program — complimentary, as our commitment to get America working.
voTechWorksGrade 13 · a vocational technology learning center, by urbanicity
newSchoolWorks.com › VoTechWorks › Technology & Design › Cybersecurity › Courses
Technology & Design · course plan
⚠ Pending professional review

This course plan, its lessons and its assessments has not yet been verified by an industry-certified professional or by a certification or approval body. It is a study draft and may contain errors. Do not use it as instructions for work on a job site or on live equipment. Always follow your instructor, your supervising professional, and current official references and regulations.

VoTechWorks program approval and accreditation are still in progress. Credentials are issued only by the certifying bodies named in each program, after their own exams.

Cybersecurity

10 courses · 1,800 clock hours · 9–12 mo full-time. Grading is competency-based: each course requires the written exam, a competent skills demonstration with zero safety faults, a signed log, and a passed safety audit; percentage weights only rank performance above the competency floor.

$17,800 COMPLIMENTARYprogram tuition
10courses
91lessons
1,800hours
35assessments
Development progressPlanCourses, lessons and assessments written for this tradeLessons91 of 91 lesson pages writtenPractice726 practice questionsResources108 reference entries (study list)Review0 lesson pages reviewed by a licensed professional
Study now: 91 lesson pages are open (lesson titles below are links).
TEC-CYBE44-01 Universal core

Universal Core: Safety, Workplace Math, Communication & Career Readiness for Cybersecurity

148 hr · $1,185 COMPLIMENTARY

This foundational course equips adult learners with the safety knowledge, technical math skills, professional communication habits, and career-readiness tools required to succeed in a cybersecurity program and enter the workforce. Students complete OSHA 10-Hour General Industry training, basic first aid and CPR awareness, and build the quantitative and literacy skills used daily in security operations. The course is explicitly mapped to the professional and analytical competency areas tested across the CompTIA Security+, CompTIA CySA+, and ISC2 CC credentials.

Outcomes
Course text

This foundational course equips adult learners with the safety knowledge, technical math skills, professional communication habits, and career-readiness tools required to succeed in a cybersecurity program and enter the workforce. Students complete OSHA 10-Hour General Industry training, basic first aid and CPR awareness, and build the quantitative and literacy skills used daily in security operations. The course is explicitly mapped to the professional and analytical competency areas tested across the CompTIA Security+, CompTIA CySA+, and ISC2 CC credentials.

How the course runs. 7 blocks: Workplace Safety for IT and Data-Center Environments (OSHA 10-Hour General Industry); First Aid Awareness and CPR Fundamentals for the IT Workplace; Trade Math for Cybersecurity: Number Systems, Subnetting, and Data Metrics; Reading Technical Documentation: CVEs, RFCs, Policy Documents, and Security Bulletins; Digital Workplace Tools: Ticketing, Email, File Management, and Version Control Basics; Technical Writing and Oral Communication for Security Professionals; Career Readiness: Resume, Professional Profiles, and Entering the Cybersecurity Workforce.

What competent looks like. Demonstrate OSHA 10-Hour General Industry safety knowledge and identify electrical, ergonomic, and physical hazards common in IT and data-center environments. Apply trade mathematics — including binary/hexadecimal conversion, subnetting arithmetic, and basic statistical reasoning — to solve cybersecurity workplace problems. Read and accurately interpret technical documentation such as RFCs, CVE advisories, policy documents, and vendor security bulletins. Use standard digital workplace tools — including a ticketing system, professional email, and version-controlled file management — to organize and communicate technical work. Produce and deliver clear written and oral technical communications suited to security audiences, including incident summaries and risk briefings. Construct a career portfolio including a resume, LinkedIn profile, and 30-second professional introduction aligned to entry-level cybersecurity roles.

Lessons · 7 blocks
#LessonHrTypeObjectiveActivitiesMaterialsCheck
1Workplace Safety for IT and Data-Center Environments (OSHA 10-Hour General Industry)24theoryStudents will identify and explain OSHA 10-Hour General Industry hazard categories — including electrical safety, lockout/tagout, ergonomics, fire safety, and PPE selection — as they apply to server rooms, network closets, and office IT environments.
  1. Complete all required OSHA 10-Hour General Industry modules using the OSHA-authorized online or in-person delivery format, answering module knowledge checks with a minimum passing score before advancing.
  2. Conduct a guided virtual walk-through of a simulated data-center floor plan, identifying at least ten specific hazards (exposed cabling, improper rack loading, blocked egress, missing PPE stations) and logging each in a hazard-identification worksheet.
  3. Participate in a table-top scenario: a UPS (uninterruptible power supply) begins smoking in the server room — students must verbally sequence the correct response including evacuation, fire extinguisher class selection (Class C), and incident notification procedures.
OSHA 10-Hour General Industry authorized course materials (print or LMS-hosted), OSHA Publication 3151 (Personal Protective Equipment), NFPA fire extinguisher class reference card, hazard-identification worksheet, data-center floor-plan diagramStudents present their completed OSHA 10-Hour card or completion certificate (issued by OSHA-authorized provider) AND score 80% or higher on instructor-administered 20-question safety knowledge quiz covering electrical hazards, PPE, lockout/tagout, and emergency procedures.
2First Aid Awareness and CPR Fundamentals for the IT Workplace8demoStudents will describe the steps of Hands-Only CPR, the operation of an AED, and first-aid response to the most common IT-workplace injuries — electric shock, repetitive-strain injury, and slip/fall — following American Red Cross or American Heart Association guidelines.
  1. View a Red Cross or AHA Hands-Only CPR instructional video and then practice the compression sequence on a manikin (or, where unavailable, a firm cushion with an instructor counting cadence), achieving a rate of approximately 100–120 compressions per minute.
  2. Locate the nearest AED in the building or on a facility diagram, read the illustrated AED instruction placard aloud step-by-step, and explain to a partner when an AED should and should not be applied.
  3. Role-play a scenario in which a colleague receives a mild electrical shock from server equipment: students demonstrate how to ensure the power source is de-energized before touching the patient, call 911, keep the patient still, and document the incident on a sample OSHA 300 log entry.
American Red Cross First Aid/CPR/AED reference guide or AHA Hands-Only CPR instructional poster, CPR manikin (if available) or firm practice surface, AED trainer unit or placard, sample OSHA 300 log form, PPE (disposable gloves for manikin use)Students correctly verbalize all steps of Hands-Only CPR in sequence AND correctly narrate AED operation in a role-play scenario with no critical steps omitted; instructor marks a pass/fail competency checklist with all critical steps required for pass.
3Trade Math for Cybersecurity: Number Systems, Subnetting, and Data Metrics28practiceStudents will convert values among binary, decimal, and hexadecimal number systems and perform basic IPv4 subnet calculations — including CIDR notation, usable host counts, and network/broadcast address identification — at the accuracy level required for Security+ and CySA+ exam questions.
  1. Complete a structured drill set of 40 binary-to-decimal, decimal-to-binary, and hex-to-decimal conversion problems (no calculator), self-check against an answer key, identify error patterns, and repeat until achieving 90% accuracy on a second set.
  2. Using a printed IPv4 subnetting worksheet, calculate the network address, broadcast address, valid host range, and number of usable hosts for ten /24–/28 CIDR blocks; verify answers with a subnetting reference chart and discuss why subnetting knowledge supports network segmentation as a security control (mapped to Security+ domain: Network Security).
  3. Interpret a sample network traffic report that expresses data volumes in bits, bytes, kilobytes, megabytes, and gigabytes per second; convert all values to a common unit, rank interfaces by throughput, and write two sentences explaining which interface poses the highest anomalous-traffic risk — connecting quantitative reasoning to threat analysis (mapped to CySA+ domain: Threat and Vulnerability Management).
IPv4 subnetting reference worksheet, binary/hex conversion drill sheets, calculator (for verification only after manual calculation), CompTIA Security+ Exam Objectives (current version, free download from CompTIA.org), CompTIA CySA+ Exam Objectives (current version)Students complete a 20-question trade math quiz — 10 number-system conversions and 10 subnetting calculations — and score 80% or higher with all work shown; any score below 80% triggers a targeted remediation set before the next lesson.
4Reading Technical Documentation: CVEs, RFCs, Policy Documents, and Security Bulletins20theoryStudents will accurately extract, summarize, and apply information from four types of cybersecurity technical documents — CVE advisories, IETF RFCs, organizational security policies, and vendor security bulletins — demonstrating comprehension at a level that supports exam reading passages and real operational decisions.
  1. Read one published CVE record from the NIST National Vulnerability Database (NVD) and complete a structured annotation: identify the affected product, CVSS base score and its meaning, attack vector, and recommended remediation action; compare annotations with a partner and reconcile any differences (mapped to Security+ domain: Threats, Attacks, and Vulnerabilities; CySA+ domain: Vulnerability Management).
  2. Read a two-page excerpt from an IETF RFC (instructor selects a readable, security-relevant RFC such as RFC 5246 on TLS or RFC 4949 on Internet Security Glossary) and answer five comprehension questions that require distinguishing normative language ('MUST,' 'SHOULD,' 'MAY') from informative text, practicing the careful reading skills required on certification exams.
  3. Receive a sample organizational Acceptable Use Policy (AUP) and an associated vendor security bulletin; write a one-paragraph operational memo addressed to a fictional IT manager that explains what user action is required, by when, and why — practicing the translation of technical text into plain-language workplace communication (mapped to ISC2 CC domain: Security Principles).
NIST NVD website access (nvd.nist.gov), printed or PDF CVE annotation worksheet, RFC excerpt (instructor-selected), IETF RFC style guide one-pager, sample Acceptable Use Policy (instructor-created), sample vendor security bulletin (instructor-created or redacted real example), CompTIA Security+ and CySA+ Exam ObjectivesStudents submit their CVE annotation and operational memo; CVE annotation must correctly identify all four fields (product, CVSS score meaning, attack vector, remediation) and memo must be factually accurate relative to the source document — instructor uses a rubric with a 75% minimum score across all required elements.
5Digital Workplace Tools: Ticketing, Email, File Management, and Version Control Basics18labStudents will create, assign, update, and close a simulated IT security help-desk ticket; compose professional technical email; organize project files using a consistent naming convention; and use basic Git commands (init, add, commit, log) to track document revisions.
  1. Using a free-tier instance of a ticketing tool (such as osTicket or a simulated LMS-based ticket queue), receive a fictional 'suspicious login alert' ticket, add a work note documenting the investigation steps taken, escalate with a written justification, and close the ticket with a resolution summary — practicing documentation discipline critical in security operations (mapped to CySA+ domain: Security Operations and Monitoring).
  2. Respond to two instructor-composed sample emails — one from a nervous end user who received a phishing warning, one from a supervisor requesting an urgent vulnerability status update — writing professional replies that are accurate, free of jargon where the audience requires plain language, and appropriately concise.
  3. Create a local Git repository, add a plain-text incident-notes file, make two documented revisions with meaningful commit messages, and run 'git log' to display the revision history; submit a screenshot of the terminal output showing at least three commits, demonstrating understanding of version control as both a documentation and integrity tool.
PC with internet access, osTicket (open source, free) or LMS-based ticket simulator, Git (open source, free download from git-scm.com), Git Cheat Sheet (GitHub Education, free PDF), sample email prompts (instructor-created), file-naming convention guide (instructor-created one-pager)Instructor reviews the completed ticket for required fields (work note, escalation justification, resolution summary), both email replies for professionalism and accuracy, and the Git log screenshot for at least three meaningful commits — each component graded on a rubric; students must pass all three components at 75% or higher.
6Technical Writing and Oral Communication for Security Professionals26practiceStudents will write a structured one-page incident summary report and deliver a three-minute oral briefing on a security scenario, demonstrating the written and verbal communication skills evaluated in ISC2 CC, Security+, and CySA+ performance-based questions and expected by employers in entry-level security roles.
  1. Given a two-paragraph fictional scenario describing a ransomware alert on a workstation, students draft a one-page incident summary using a provided template that requires: a brief executive summary (2–3 sentences), timeline of observed events, affected assets, recommended immediate actions, and next steps — practicing the structured writing used in real security operations centers.
  2. Peer-review a partner's incident summary using a structured rubric, providing written feedback on accuracy, clarity, completeness, and professional tone; then revise their own report based on feedback received — mirroring the iterative documentation workflow in professional security teams.
  3. Deliver a three-minute stand-up briefing to the class on the same scenario, without reading from notes, covering: what happened, what was done, and what is recommended next; receive instructor feedback using a public-speaking rubric focused on clarity, accuracy, pacing, and appropriate use of technical terminology for a mixed technical/non-technical audience.
Incident summary report template (instructor-created, aligned to NIST SP 800-61 structure), peer-review rubric, oral briefing rubric, fictional ransomware scenario handout, NIST Special Publication 800-61 Rev. 2 (Computer Security Incident Handling Guide, free download from NIST.gov)Incident summary scored on rubric — minimum 75% overall, with no critical fields (executive summary, timeline, recommended actions) left blank or factually incorrect; oral briefing scored on separate rubric — minimum 75%, with automatic failure if duration is under 2 minutes or the scenario facts are materially misstated.
7Career Readiness: Resume, Professional Profiles, and Entering the Cybersecurity Workforce24fieldStudents will produce a complete, employer-ready cybersecurity resume, an updated LinkedIn profile aligned to entry-level security roles, and a polished 30-second professional introduction, demonstrating readiness to apply for positions such as SOC Analyst Tier 1, IT Security Technician, or Help Desk Security Specialist.
  1. Research three real, currently-posted entry-level cybersecurity job listings (SOC analyst, security technician, or related role) using a job board such as LinkedIn, Indeed, or USAJobs; identify the five most-frequently listed required skills and credentials across all three listings; then draft a one-page resume using a clean, ATS-friendly template that highlights those skills and maps to the CompTIA Security+, CySA+, and ISC2 CC credentials the student will earn.
  2. Build or update a LinkedIn profile to include a professional headline using role-relevant keywords (e.g., 'Cybersecurity Student | CompTIA Security+ Candidate'), a summary paragraph describing career goals, the program being completed, and relevant coursework or projects; connect with at least three classmates and follow two cybersecurity professional organizations (such as ISACA or (ISC)²) — practicing professional networking.
  3. Prepare and deliver a 30-second professional introduction ('elevator pitch') that states the student's name, current training, one relevant skill or strength, and the type of role they are seeking; deliver it twice — once to a partner and once on video recording — then self-evaluate using a provided checklist for clarity, confidence, professional language, and appropriate length.
ATS-friendly resume template (instructor-provided, Word or Google Docs format), job-board access (LinkedIn, Indeed, or USAJobs), LinkedIn account (free tier), professional-introduction checklist, video recording device (phone or webcam), career services handout listing local and national cybersecurity professional associations (ISACA, (ISC)², CompTIA AITP)Resume evaluated on instructor rubric — must include contact info, objective/summary, education section listing credential targets, a skills section with at least five relevant technical terms drawn from the job listings, and correct formatting (no spelling errors, consistent dates); LinkedIn profile reviewed for required sections; elevator pitch evaluated on checklist — must meet time requirement (25–35 seconds) and include all four required elements; all three components must meet rubric threshold of 75% to pass.
Assessments
AssessmentTypeWeightPass standardMethod & rubric
Safety and Regulatory Knowledge ExamWritten exam25%80% correct (16 of 20 questions)A 20-question multiple-choice exam covering OSHA 10-Hour General Industry content — including electrical hazards, lockout/tagout procedures, PPE selection, fire extinguisher classes, ergonomics, and emergency response — as applied to IT and data-center workplaces. Students must also correctly answer at least one question on CPR sequence and one on electric-shock first-aid response; failure on either of those two questions requires a single oral make-up before the student may advance.
Accuracy · Safety · Communication · Professionalism
Trade Math and Technical Reading ExamWritten exam25%80% correct (20 of 25 questions)A 25-question written exam combining 15 trade math items (binary/hex conversion, CIDR subnetting, data-unit conversion) and 10 technical reading comprehension items drawn from excerpts similar to CVE advisories, RFC language, and policy documents; the exam is administered without open resources and is timed at 45 minutes to simulate certification exam conditions for Security+ and CySA+.
Accuracy · Safety · Communication · Professionalism
Career Portfolio ProjectProject25%75% overall on rubric; all three required deliverables must be submittedStudents submit a complete career portfolio package consisting of their one-page cybersecurity resume, a documented LinkedIn profile (URL submitted for instructor review), and a video recording of their 30-second professional introduction; each component is scored on its respective rubric and an overall average of 75% or higher is required for the portfolio to be accepted as complete.
Accuracy · Safety · Communication · Professionalism
Oral Competency DefenseOral / panel25%Pass on all four required competency areas; no single area may be scored 'unsatisfactory'A 10-minute one-on-one oral session with the instructor in which the student is asked two questions drawn from safety, one from trade math, and one from professional communication — for example, 'Walk me through how you would respond if you found an unlabeled server room circuit breaker that a colleague had taped in the ON position' or 'Convert 192.168.10.0/26 — how many usable hosts does that subnet support?'; the student must respond clearly and accurately without notes, and the instructor scores each response as satisfactory or unsatisfactory using a structured rubric.
Accuracy · Safety · Communication · Professionalism
TEC-CYBE44-02 Trade course

Cybersecurity Threats: Attack Types, Threat Actors, and Vulnerability Analysis

171 hr · $2,050 COMPLIMENTARY

This course builds foundational knowledge of the threat landscape that cybersecurity professionals defend against, covering threat actor categories, attack techniques, vulnerability types, and the reconnaissance and exploitation lifecycle. Students analyze real-world attack scenarios, map threats to the MITRE ATT&CK framework, and practice identifying indicators of compromise using industry-standard tools. Content aligns directly to CompTIA Security+ (SY0-701) Domain 2 (Threats, Vulnerabilities, and Mitigations), CompTIA CySA+ threat and vulnerability management domains, and ISC2 CC Domain 2 (Business Continuity, Disaster Recovery, and Incident Response Concepts) and Domain 3 (Access Controls).

Outcomes
Course text

This course builds foundational knowledge of the threat landscape that cybersecurity professionals defend against, covering threat actor categories, attack techniques, vulnerability types, and the reconnaissance and exploitation lifecycle. Students analyze real-world attack scenarios, map threats to the MITRE ATT&CK framework, and practice identifying indicators of compromise using industry-standard tools. Content aligns directly to CompTIA Security+ (SY0-701) Domain 2 (Threats, Vulnerabilities, and Mitigations), CompTIA CySA+ threat and vulnerability management domains, and ISC2 CC Domain 2 (Business Continuity, Disaster Recovery, and Incident Response Concepts) and Domain 3 (Access Controls).

How the course runs. 12 blocks: The Threat Landscape: Actors, Motivations, and the Security Mindset; Social Engineering: Phishing, Pretexting, and Human-Layer Attacks; Malware Types: Viruses, Worms, Trojans, Ransomware, Spyware, and Rootkits; Network-Based Attacks: DoS, DDoS, Man-in-the-Middle, and Replay Attacks; Application-Layer Attacks: Injection, XSS, CSRF, and Buffer Overflow; The Cyber Kill Chain and Attack Lifecycle; MITRE ATT&CK Framework: Tactics, Techniques, and Procedures; Reconnaissance: OSINT, Scanning, and Enumeration Techniques; Vulnerability Scanning and CVSS Scoring; Threat Intelligence: IOCs, Feeds, and Sharing Standards; Insider Threats and Supply Chain Risks; Threat Scenario Capstone: Attack Analysis and Defensive Briefing.

What competent looks like. Classify threat actors by motivation, capability, and typical attack vector, distinguishing nation-state, cybercriminal, hacktivist, insider, and script-kiddie profiles. Identify and explain the stages of the Cyber Kill Chain and MITRE ATT&CK framework tactics, techniques, and procedures (TTPs) for a given attack scenario. Recognize common attack types including phishing, social engineering, malware variants, injection attacks, man-in-the-middle, denial-of-service, and supply-chain attacks. Perform a basic vulnerability scan using an industry-standard tool, interpret the output, and prioritize findings by CVSS score. Analyze indicators of compromise (IOCs) from logs, network captures, and file artifacts to determine likely attack type and affected systems. Document threat intelligence findings in a structured report using standard templates aligned to professional SOC workflows.

Lessons · 12 blocks
#LessonHrTypeObjectiveActivitiesMaterialsCheck
1The Threat Landscape: Actors, Motivations, and the Security Mindset12theoryStudents will categorize at least five distinct threat actor types by motivation, resources, and typical targeting behavior with at least 80% accuracy on a written assessment.
  1. Read and annotate the Verizon Data Breach Investigations Report (DBIR) summary section on threat actors; complete a structured note-taking worksheet identifying actor categories and motivations.
  2. Complete a threat actor profiling exercise: given five anonymized real-world breach summaries, students assign each to a threat actor category and justify their classification in writing.
  3. Participate in a facilitated class discussion comparing nation-state actors to organized cybercrime groups, using publicly available threat intelligence reports (e.g., CISA advisories) as primary sources.
Verizon DBIR (current edition, publicly available PDF), CISA threat advisories, CompTIA Security+ Study Guide (SY0-701) Chapter on Threats, whiteboard, printed actor profile cardsGraded threat actor classification worksheet; students must correctly categorize at least 4 of 5 scenarios and provide accurate written justifications — pass mark 80%.
2Social Engineering: Phishing, Pretexting, and Human-Layer Attacks15demoStudents will identify social engineering techniques in simulated communications and explain the psychological principles that make each technique effective.
  1. Instructor demonstrates analysis of three phishing email samples using a header analysis tool (e.g., MXToolbox) and an email client; students follow along and document red flags on a printed checklist.
  2. Students examine a set of 10 sample emails and categorize each as spear-phishing, whaling, vishing script, smishing, or legitimate communication, citing specific indicators for each decision.
  3. Role-play exercise in pairs: one student reads a pretexting phone script while the other records which psychological principles (authority, urgency, social proof, scarcity) are being exploited, then partners switch roles.
Sample phishing email corpus (instructor-created or from PhishTank archives), MXToolbox web tool, email header analysis worksheet, social engineering principles reference card, CompTIA Security+ SY0-701 objectives section on social engineeringStudents submit a completed email analysis checklist for all 10 samples; pass mark is correct identification of at least 8 of 10 with at least one supporting indicator cited per answer — 80% correct.
3Malware Types: Viruses, Worms, Trojans, Ransomware, Spyware, and Rootkits15theoryStudents will distinguish among six categories of malware by mechanism of infection, persistence method, and payload behavior, and match each to a real-world example.
  1. Read assigned textbook sections on malware taxonomy; complete a comparison matrix mapping each malware type to: infection vector, persistence mechanism, primary payload, and one documented historical incident.
  2. Watch instructor-narrated walkthrough of VirusTotal submission results for two sample hashes (pre-selected benign test files); students record detection names, behavior tags, and sandbox results on a structured form.
  3. Small-group analysis activity: each group receives a one-page incident description from a public post-incident report (e.g., a published government or CISA advisory) and identifies the malware type involved, justifying their answer with three evidence points from the text.
CompTIA Security+ SY0-701 study guide, VirusTotal web tool (sandbox results view), printed incident description handouts sourced from public CISA advisories, malware taxonomy comparison matrix worksheetCompleted comparison matrix graded for accuracy; pass mark is 80% of cells correct. Group activity write-up must include all three required evidence points — pass requires all three present and accurately linked to the malware type.
4Network-Based Attacks: DoS, DDoS, Man-in-the-Middle, and Replay Attacks14demoStudents will explain the mechanism, traffic characteristics, and defensive countermeasures for denial-of-service, distributed denial-of-service, man-in-the-middle, and replay attack types.
  1. Instructor demonstrates packet captures of a simulated SYN flood in Wireshark on a closed lab network; students annotate a printed packet diagram identifying source/destination, flag values, and volume anomalies.
  2. Students use Wireshark (installed on isolated lab VMs) to open a pre-captured .pcap file containing an ARP poisoning sequence and answer a guided question sheet identifying attacker MAC, victim IP, and the point of interception.
  3. Instructor-led diagram walkthrough of a DDoS botnet architecture on the whiteboard; students reproduce the diagram from memory and label each component (C2 server, bot, amplification reflector, target) in their lab notebooks.
Wireshark (open-source, installed on isolated lab VMs), pre-captured .pcap files (instructor-created on isolated network), printed packet diagram handouts, lab notebook, CompTIA Security+ SY0-701 study guide — network attacks chapterGraded guided question sheet from the ARP poisoning .pcap exercise; students must correctly identify attacker MAC, victim IP, interception point, and recommend one countermeasure — pass mark 75%. Diagram from memory checked against instructor key — all five labeled components required to pass.
5Application-Layer Attacks: Injection, XSS, CSRF, and Buffer Overflow15labStudents will execute and document SQL injection and cross-site scripting attacks against a deliberately vulnerable web application in an isolated lab environment, explaining the mechanism of each.
  1. Students install and launch DVWA (Damn Vulnerable Web Application) on a local isolated VM; instructor walks through the lab setup checklist to confirm network isolation before any activity begins.
  2. Students perform a guided SQL injection exercise on DVWA's SQL Injection module at low security level, recording each payload tried, the application response, and the data returned in a structured lab log.
  3. Students perform a stored XSS injection on DVWA's XSS module, capture a screenshot of the alert box, and write a short explanation (minimum five sentences) of how the payload persists and what real-world impact it could have.
DVWA (open-source, installed on isolated VM — no internet connectivity), VirtualBox or VMware Workstation Player, lab log template, CompTIA Security+ SY0-701 and CySA+ study guides — application attacks sections, OWASP Top 10 reference (owasp.org)Completed lab log with at least three distinct SQL injection payloads documented with responses, plus XSS screenshot and written explanation; instructor confirms VM network isolation before grading. Pass requires all entries present, network isolation confirmed, and explanation meeting minimum length with accurate mechanism description — 80% rubric score.
6The Cyber Kill Chain and Attack Lifecycle14theoryStudents will map the seven stages of the Lockheed Martin Cyber Kill Chain to a given attack narrative and identify what defensive action could disrupt each stage.
  1. Read the original Lockheed Martin Cyber Kill Chain white paper (publicly available); annotate each of the seven stages with a definition, attacker action example, and one possible defender disruption in the margins.
  2. Given a two-page written attack narrative (instructor-authored, based on the structure of a publicly documented APT campaign), students complete a Kill Chain mapping worksheet identifying attacker actions at each stage.
  3. Class debrief: students compare their Kill Chain maps in small groups, resolve discrepancies, and each group presents one stage with their chosen disruption strategy to the class, receiving peer and instructor feedback.
Lockheed Martin Cyber Kill Chain white paper (publicly available PDF), instructor-authored attack narrative handout, Kill Chain mapping worksheet, CompTIA Security+ SY0-701 study guide — threat intelligence chapter, MITRE ATT&CK website (attack.mitre.org)Kill Chain mapping worksheet graded against instructor answer key; students must correctly place attacker actions in at least six of seven stages and provide a plausible disruption strategy for each — pass mark 80%.
7MITRE ATT&CK Framework: Tactics, Techniques, and Procedures14practiceStudents will navigate the MITRE ATT&CK framework to look up at least five techniques for a given tactic and map them to a realistic threat scenario with documented evidence.
  1. Guided navigation exercise: instructor assigns each student a specific ATT&CK tactic (e.g., Initial Access, Persistence, Lateral Movement); students use the ATT&CK Navigator web tool to identify five techniques under that tactic and record the technique ID, name, and one real-world procedure example for each.
  2. Students receive a fictional but realistic incident timeline (instructor-authored) and individually map each attacker action to an ATT&CK technique ID, creating an annotated ATT&CK layer file using ATT&CK Navigator.
  3. Pairs compare their ATT&CK layer files, discuss discrepancies, and collaboratively write a one-paragraph threat actor profile using ATT&CK terminology that could be included in a threat intelligence report.
MITRE ATT&CK Navigator (web-based, attack.mitre.org/resources/attack-navigator/), instructor-authored incident timeline handout, ATT&CK layer mapping worksheet, CompTIA CySA+ study guide — threat intelligence and threat hunting chaptersSubmitted ATT&CK mapping worksheet and Navigator layer file; pass requires all attacker actions mapped to a technique ID with the correct tactic parent, and co-authored threat actor profile uses ATT&CK terminology accurately — 80% rubric score.
8Reconnaissance: OSINT, Scanning, and Enumeration Techniques14labStudents will conduct passive OSINT reconnaissance on an instructor-designated practice target and active scanning on an isolated lab target, documenting findings in a structured reconnaissance report.
  1. Passive OSINT lab: using publicly available tools (WHOIS lookup, Shodan.io search of the class's own school IP range with instructor permission, Google dorks on a designated practice site), students record domain registration data, open ports visible on Shodan, and publicly indexed information in a reconnaissance log.
  2. Active scanning lab on isolated network only: students run an Nmap scan (nmap -sV -O) against a pre-configured vulnerable VM (e.g., Metasploitable2 on an air-gapped subnet), record open ports, services, and OS fingerprint, and cross-reference findings with CVE descriptions on nvd.nist.gov.
  3. Students compile passive and active findings into a one-page reconnaissance report using a provided template, marking which findings represent significant attack surface and explaining why.
Nmap (open-source), Metasploitable2 VM (isolated subnet — no internet routing), WHOIS web tool, Shodan.io (instructor account for class use, scoped to authorized targets only), NVD (nvd.nist.gov), reconnaissance report template, CompTIA Security+ SY0-701 and CySA+ study guidesSubmitted reconnaissance report reviewed by instructor; pass requires active scan performed only on isolated lab VM (instructor verifies network logs), passive OSINT sources documented, at least three CVEs cross-referenced, and attack surface assessment present — 80% rubric score. Any evidence of scanning unauthorized targets is an automatic fail and academic integrity referral.
9Vulnerability Scanning and CVSS Scoring15labStudents will run a credentialed vulnerability scan against an isolated lab target using OpenVAS or a comparable open-source scanner, interpret the results, and prioritize findings by CVSS score.
  1. Instructor demonstrates the OpenVAS (Greenbone Community Edition) scanning interface on a projected screen, configuring a credentialed scan task against Metasploitable2; students follow along using their own lab VMs and complete a setup checklist confirming scan scope is limited to the isolated subnet.
  2. Students launch their own credentialed scan, wait for completion, then export and review the report; they list the top five findings by CVSS score, record the CVSS vector string for each, and identify the vulnerable component.
  3. Students complete a CVSS scoring worksheet: given three vulnerability descriptions (instructor-authored, modeled on real CVE entries but anonymized), students manually derive a CVSS v3.1 base score using the CVSS calculator at first.org/cvss/calculator/3.1 and compare their scores to the instructor's key.
OpenVAS / Greenbone Community Edition (open-source, installed on lab VM), Metasploitable2 VM (isolated subnet), CVSS v3.1 calculator (first.org), CVSS scoring worksheet, NVD (nvd.nist.gov) for reference, CompTIA CySA+ study guide — vulnerability management chapterSubmitted scan report export and completed CVSS worksheet; pass requires scan scope confirmed to isolated subnet (instructor verifies), top five findings listed with correct CVSS scores, and manual CVSS scores within 0.5 of instructor key for at least 2 of 3 worksheet items — 80% rubric score.
10Threat Intelligence: IOCs, Feeds, and Sharing Standards14practiceStudents will identify indicators of compromise from a provided log set and encode them in STIX format using a basic template, demonstrating understanding of structured threat intelligence sharing.
  1. Students analyze a provided Windows Event Log export (instructor-created, modeled on common malware behavior patterns) and highlight IOCs — suspicious process names, unusual login times, unexpected outbound connections — on a printed annotated log worksheet.
  2. Using a pre-populated STIX 2.1 JSON template (instructor-provided), students encode at least three IOCs (IP address, file hash, domain name) from the log analysis into the correct STIX object fields using a text editor.
  3. Class discussion: instructor presents three open-source threat intelligence feeds (e.g., AlienVault OTX, CISA known exploited vulnerabilities catalog, Abuse.ch) and students evaluate each for coverage, update frequency, and format, recording findings in a comparison table.
Printed annotated log worksheet (instructor-created), STIX 2.1 JSON template (instructor-provided), text editor (VS Code or Notepad++), AlienVault OTX (otx.alienvault.com), CISA KEV catalog (cisa.gov/known-exploited-vulnerabilities-catalog), Abuse.ch, CompTIA CySA+ study guide — threat intelligence chapterSubmitted annotated log worksheet and STIX JSON file; pass requires at least five IOCs correctly identified in the log with type labeled, and STIX JSON file is syntactically valid with at least three IOC objects correctly populated — 80% rubric score.
11Insider Threats and Supply Chain Risks14theoryStudents will analyze insider threat and supply chain attack scenarios and recommend at least three specific technical or administrative controls to reduce risk in each case.
  1. Read two publicly available post-incident analyses involving insider threats (instructor selects from published government or academic sources); students complete a structured analysis worksheet identifying actor type, method of access, data accessed, and detection gap.
  2. Class case study discussion of a well-documented supply chain attack (using only publicly available information); students map the attack to the Kill Chain and identify the specific supply chain entry point, then brainstorm controls that could have interrupted the attack at each stage.
  3. Students write a one-page security recommendation memo addressed to a fictional IT manager for each scenario (insider threat and supply chain), each recommending three specific controls drawn from NIST SP 800-161 (supply chain) and NIST SP 800-53 (access controls) reference summaries provided by the instructor.
Instructor-selected public post-incident analysis documents, Kill Chain mapping worksheet, NIST SP 800-161 summary handout (instructor-prepared from nist.gov), NIST SP 800-53 control family reference card (instructor-prepared), CompTIA Security+ SY0-701 study guide — threat actors and supply chain chapterTwo submitted recommendation memos graded by rubric; each memo must name at least three specific, actionable controls (not vague recommendations), cite a NIST reference for each, and correctly identify the threat category — pass mark 80% rubric score.
12Threat Scenario Capstone: Attack Analysis and Defensive Briefing15practiceStudents will independently analyze a multi-stage attack scenario, produce a complete threat analysis report mapped to the ATT&CK framework, and deliver a five-minute defensive briefing to the class.
  1. Students receive a comprehensive fictional incident package (instructor-authored: email logs, network captures, vulnerability scan output, and an event log excerpt) and independently produce a written threat analysis report identifying threat actor category, attack techniques with ATT&CK IDs, IOCs, affected assets, and recommended countermeasures.
  2. Students prepare a five-slide briefing presentation summarizing: threat actor profile, Kill Chain stage reached, top three ATT&CK techniques used, CVSS-scored vulnerabilities exploited, and three prioritized remediation recommendations.
  3. Each student delivers their five-minute briefing to the class and instructor, responds to at least two peer or instructor questions, and submits their written report and slides as a complete portfolio artifact.
Instructor-authored incident package (printed), ATT&CK Navigator (web), MITRE ATT&CK website, CVSS calculator (first.org), slide deck software (LibreOffice Impress or Google Slides), threat analysis report template, CompTIA Security+ SY0-701 and CySA+ study guidesGraded on written report rubric (ATT&CK mapping accuracy, IOC identification, remediation quality) and presentation rubric (clarity, accuracy, response to questions); pass requires 80% on both rubrics independently. Missing ATT&CK IDs or absent remediation section results in automatic revision required before credit.
Assessments
AssessmentTypeWeightPass standardMethod & rubric
Threats Knowledge ExamWritten exam25%75% correct (38 of 50 questions)A 50-question multiple-choice and scenario-based exam covering threat actor types, malware categories, attack techniques, the Cyber Kill Chain, MITRE ATT&CK framework, CVSS scoring, IOC identification, and insider and supply chain threats, aligned to CompTIA Security+ SY0-701 Domain 2 objectives and ISC2 CC Domain 2 and 3 knowledge areas. Students complete the exam individually without notes in a timed 90-minute sitting.
Standard met · Safety · Time · Quality/finish · Documentation
Vulnerability Scan and ATT&CK Mapping Skills DemonstrationSkills demonstration45%Pass on all three rubric categories (setup, scan accuracy, ATT&CK mapping) each at 75% or higherStudents independently configure and run a vulnerability scan against an instructor-assigned isolated lab target, export and interpret the report, and map the top five findings to MITRE ATT&CK techniques, presenting results verbally to the instructor. The demonstration assesses hands-on tool proficiency and the ability to communicate findings clearly, aligned to CompTIA CySA+ threat and vulnerability management performance-based objectives.
Standard met · Safety · Time · Quality/finish · Documentation
Lab Log PortfolioLog15%All five required lab entries present and meeting minimum documentation standard; average rubric score 80% or higherStudents submit a compiled lab log portfolio containing completed documentation from the five lab and practice lessons (application attacks, reconnaissance, vulnerability scanning, IOC and STIX encoding, and the capstone scenario analysis), demonstrating progressive skill development and adherence to professional documentation standards. Each entry is evaluated for accuracy, completeness, and correct tool use; entries showing evidence of scanning unauthorized targets or falsified results result in automatic failure and academic integrity review.
Standard met · Safety · Time · Quality/finish · Documentation
Ethical and Safe Lab Conduct Safety CheckSafety audit15%Pass all four criteria; any single failure requires remediation before further lab access is grantedBefore receiving unsupervised lab access, each student is evaluated by the instructor on four behavioral safety criteria: (1) correctly verifying network isolation of lab VMs before any active scanning activity, (2) confirming OSINT and scanning activity is limited to authorized targets only, (3) demonstrating proper handling and disposal of sensitive data artifacts (log files, scan exports) per class data handling policy, and (4) accurately stating the legal and ethical boundaries of authorized penetration testing activity under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA) general framework. This check aligns to ISC2 CC Domain 1 (Security Principles) ethics requirements and CompTIA Security+ professional ethics objectives.
Standard met · Safety · Time · Quality/finish · Documentation
TEC-CYBE44-03 Trade course

Security Operations: Monitoring, Defense, and Controls

171 hr · $2,050 COMPLIMENTARY

This course builds the hands-on skills needed to operate a security-conscious IT environment, covering network defense, access control, cryptography, vulnerability management, and security monitoring. Students configure and test real controls on live systems and virtual labs, interpreting results against industry frameworks. Lessons map directly to CompTIA Security+ and ISC2 CC exam domains, reinforcing the threat knowledge gained in Course 2.

Outcomes
Course text

This course builds the hands-on skills needed to operate a security-conscious IT environment, covering network defense, access control, cryptography, vulnerability management, and security monitoring. Students configure and test real controls on live systems and virtual labs, interpreting results against industry frameworks. Lessons map directly to CompTIA Security+ and ISC2 CC exam domains, reinforcing the threat knowledge gained in Course 2.

How the course runs. 12 blocks: Security Operations Foundations and the Defense-in-Depth Model; Identity and Access Management: Concepts and Policies; Authentication Technologies and Multi-Factor Authentication Lab; Cryptography Fundamentals: Encryption, Hashing, and Key Management; PKI and Certificate Management Lab; Network Security Architecture: Firewalls, VLANs, and DMZ Design; Secure Network Protocols and Protocol Hardening; Endpoint Hardening and Patch Management; Physical Security Controls and Environmental Safeguards; Vulnerability Scanning and CVSS-Based Prioritization; Security Monitoring: Logs, Alerts, and Baseline Behavior; Security Operations Capstone Lab: Hardening, Scanning, and Reporting.

What competent looks like. Configure and verify access control mechanisms including authentication, authorization, and account management policies on a live system. Implement and evaluate cryptographic controls such as symmetric/asymmetric encryption, hashing, and PKI certificate management. Perform a structured vulnerability scan, interpret the output, and prioritize remediation using a recognized scoring system such as CVSS. Apply network security controls including firewalls, VLANs, DMZ architecture, and secure network protocols to a lab environment. Demonstrate physical security and endpoint hardening measures consistent with a defense-in-depth strategy. Document security operations activities — including scan results, control configurations, and change records — to a professional standard.

Lessons · 12 blocks
#LessonHrTypeObjectiveActivitiesMaterialsCheck
1Security Operations Foundations and the Defense-in-Depth Model12theoryStudents will explain the defense-in-depth model, identify the major security control categories (preventive, detective, corrective, compensating), and map them to real operational roles.
  1. Diagram a layered defense-in-depth architecture for a small business scenario, labeling each layer with a specific control and its category.
  2. Classify a provided list of 20 security controls as preventive, detective, corrective, or compensating and justify each classification in writing.
  3. Research and present a real-world breach case study, identifying which control layers failed or were absent and what corrective controls could have helped.
CompTIA Security+ Study Guide (current exam version), ISC2 CC Official Study Guide, whiteboard/diagramming software (draw.io or equivalent), case study handouts from publicly available breach reports (e.g., Verizon DBIR summary).Students score at least 75% on a 20-question multiple-choice quiz covering control categories and defense-in-depth layers; diagram must correctly label a minimum of five distinct layers.
2Identity and Access Management: Concepts and Policies14theoryStudents will define identification, authentication, authorization, and accounting (IAAA) and distinguish among access control models including DAC, MAC, RBAC, and ABAC.
  1. Compare and contrast DAC, MAC, RBAC, and ABAC using a provided scenario set; for each scenario choose the most appropriate model and explain why in a written paragraph.
  2. Construct a sample Role-Based Access Control matrix for a fictional 50-person organization with at least five roles, specifying permissions for five shared resources.
  3. Analyze a provided access control policy document for gaps or violations of least-privilege and separation-of-duties principles, producing a written finding list.
CompTIA Security+ Study Guide, NIST SP 800-63 (digital identity guidelines — publicly available), sample access control policy templates, spreadsheet software for RBAC matrix.Written RBAC matrix is complete and enforces least privilege; scenario analysis identifies at least 80% of planted policy gaps; quiz score of 75% or higher on IAM concepts.
3Authentication Technologies and Multi-Factor Authentication Lab15labStudents will configure multi-factor authentication (MFA) on a test system and compare the security trade-offs of password-based, token-based, biometric, and certificate-based authentication methods.
  1. Enable and test MFA on a provided lab user account using a software authenticator app (e.g., Google Authenticator or Microsoft Authenticator), documenting each configuration step with screenshots.
  2. Attempt to authenticate using incorrect factors and record the system response to verify that MFA enforcement is functioning correctly.
  3. Complete a structured comparison table of five authentication methods rating each on strength, usability, cost, and susceptibility to common attacks such as phishing and credential stuffing.
Lab workstations or VMs (Windows Server or Linux with an MFA-capable service configured by instructor), software authenticator app, lab guide, screenshot capture tool.Lab report shows successful MFA configuration with annotated screenshots; student correctly explains the lockout behavior observed; comparison table is complete and technically accurate; lab report graded at 75% or higher.
4Cryptography Fundamentals: Encryption, Hashing, and Key Management15theoryStudents will explain symmetric encryption, asymmetric encryption, and hashing, identify common algorithms in each category, and describe proper key management practices.
  1. Use a provided algorithm reference sheet to classify AES, RSA, ECC, SHA-256, and MD5 by type, key length, and appropriate modern use case, noting which are considered deprecated or weak.
  2. Illustrate the asymmetric key exchange process for a secure email scenario using a step-by-step diagram with labeled public and private keys.
  3. Evaluate a sample key management policy for compliance with general best practices (key rotation, secure storage, key escrow), listing each gap found.
CompTIA Security+ Study Guide, NIST SP 800-57 (key management guidelines — publicly available), algorithm reference handout, diagramming software.Algorithm classification table is accurate; diagram correctly depicts the asymmetric process including both encryption and signature steps; policy evaluation identifies planted gaps at a rate of 75% or higher; quiz score 75% or higher.
5PKI and Certificate Management Lab14labStudents will generate a certificate signing request (CSR), issue a certificate from a lab certificate authority (CA), install it on a test web server, and verify the trust chain.
  1. Use OpenSSL on a Linux VM to generate a private key and CSR, then submit the CSR to the lab CA and install the signed certificate on an Apache or Nginx test server.
  2. Connect to the test server with a browser, inspect the certificate details, and document the certificate fields including subject, issuer, validity period, and key usage extensions.
  3. Deliberately introduce an expired or self-signed certificate on a second test server, observe browser warnings, and write a one-page explanation of what a real user should do and why.
Linux VMs with OpenSSL installed, lab CA (e.g., easy-rsa or a simple internal CA configured by instructor), Apache or Nginx web server packages, browser for inspection, lab guide.Certificate is correctly issued and trusted by the lab browser with no errors; lab report includes correct interpretation of all certificate fields; expired-certificate scenario is correctly explained; score 75% or higher.
6Network Security Architecture: Firewalls, VLANs, and DMZ Design15demoStudents will describe how firewalls, VLANs, and DMZ architecture reduce the attack surface of a network and configure basic firewall rules on a lab firewall appliance or software equivalent.
  1. Follow an instructor-led demonstration of VLAN configuration on a managed switch simulator or packet tracer environment, then replicate the configuration independently and verify inter-VLAN routing is blocked where intended.
  2. Configure a stateful firewall rule set on pfSense or an equivalent lab firewall to permit only specified services to the DMZ and deny all else, then test the rules using port scan results.
  3. Draw a network diagram for a small business showing the placement of the firewall, DMZ, internal LAN, and VLAN segmentation, explaining the security rationale for each design decision in a written annotation.
pfSense VM or equivalent firewall software, Cisco Packet Tracer or GNS3 for VLAN simulation, Nmap for port scanning, network diagramming tool.Firewall rule set correctly blocks unauthorized traffic as verified by Nmap scan output; VLAN configuration prevents inter-VLAN communication as specified; network diagram is architecturally sound; instructor evaluates against a rubric with 75% pass mark.
7Secure Network Protocols and Protocol Hardening13labStudents will replace or disable insecure protocols on a lab system and verify that only approved secure protocols are in use, documenting the before-and-after configuration.
  1. Use Wireshark to capture and compare traffic from Telnet and SSH sessions side by side, annotating the capture to show cleartext credentials in Telnet versus encrypted data in SSH.
  2. On a lab Linux server, disable Telnet, FTP, and SNMPv1/v2, enable SSH and SNMPv3, then run an Nmap service scan to confirm only approved services are listening.
  3. Produce a one-page protocol hardening checklist for the lab server, documenting each change made, the security reason for the change, and the verification method used.
Linux VM with Telnet, FTP, and SNMP services pre-installed for the exercise, Wireshark, Nmap, SSH client, lab guide.Wireshark annotation correctly identifies cleartext credentials; Nmap output confirms only secure services are running; hardening checklist is complete and accurate; lab report scored at 75% or higher.
8Endpoint Hardening and Patch Management14labStudents will apply a CIS Benchmark-based hardening checklist to a lab workstation, disable unnecessary services, apply available patches, and document the change record.
  1. Download and apply selected items from the CIS Benchmark for the lab OS (Windows or Linux as available), configuring settings such as password policy, account lockout, service disabling, and audit logging, capturing before-and-after screenshots.
  2. Run a free vulnerability scanner (e.g., OpenVAS or a local script) against the unhardened then hardened VM and compare the output, noting which findings were resolved.
  3. Complete a formal change record documenting each configuration change using a provided template that includes change description, reason, date, and verification method.
Windows or Linux VM (snapshot taken before hardening), CIS Benchmark PDF (publicly available from CIS), OpenVAS or equivalent scanner, change record template, screenshot tool.At least 80% of assigned CIS Benchmark items are correctly applied and verified; scanner comparison shows measurable reduction in findings; change record is complete and professionally formatted; score 75% or higher on lab rubric.
9Physical Security Controls and Environmental Safeguards10theoryStudents will identify physical security controls relevant to a data center or office environment and explain how environmental threats such as fire, flood, and power failure are mitigated.
  1. Conduct a virtual walk-through of a provided data center floor plan, identifying at least ten physical security and environmental control points and rating each as adequate, inadequate, or missing against a standard checklist.
  2. Research and summarize the roles of UPS systems, fire suppression types appropriate for server rooms, and HVAC requirements for equipment cooling, producing a one-page technical brief.
  3. Role-play a security badge audit scenario: given a list of current badge holders and a staff roster, identify individuals whose access should be revoked and document the finding.
Data center floor plan handout, physical security control checklist, reference text (CompTIA Security+ Study Guide chapter on physical security), one-page brief template.Floor plan audit identifies at least eight of ten planted deficiencies; technical brief is accurate and uses correct terminology; badge audit correctly identifies all unauthorized access holders; quiz score 75% or higher.
10Vulnerability Scanning and CVSS-Based Prioritization16labStudents will run a credentialed vulnerability scan against a lab target, interpret the results using the Common Vulnerability Scoring System (CVSS), and produce a prioritized remediation plan.
  1. Configure and launch a credentialed scan using OpenVAS or Greenbone Community Edition against a deliberately vulnerable lab VM (e.g., Metasploitable), then export the report.
  2. Select five findings from the scan report, look up or record their CVSS base scores, and rank them in remediation priority order with written justification referencing exploitability and impact metrics.
  3. Draft a one-page executive-summary remediation plan addressed to a fictional IT manager, explaining the top three vulnerabilities in plain language and recommending specific corrective actions with estimated effort.
OpenVAS / Greenbone Community Edition, Metasploitable or equivalent deliberately vulnerable VM, CVSS v3.1 scoring calculator (publicly available at NIST NVD), report template.Scan is successfully completed and report exported; CVSS prioritization is correctly ordered with accurate score references; executive summary is clear, accurate, and professionally written; lab graded at 75% or higher.
11Security Monitoring: Logs, Alerts, and Baseline Behavior15labStudents will collect and review system and network logs, identify anomalous events indicating a potential security issue, and generate a structured alert summary.
  1. Configure basic log forwarding from a Linux VM to a central log collector (e.g., syslog-ng or the ELK stack lite instance provided by the instructor), verify logs are arriving, and confirm the log format is correct.
  2. Analyze a provided set of pre-generated log files containing planted suspicious events (repeated failed logins, unusual outbound connection times, privilege escalation commands) and mark each suspicious entry with an explanation.
  3. Write a structured alert summary for one identified suspicious event using a provided template that includes timestamp, source, event description, potential impact, and recommended next step.
Linux VMs, syslog-ng or instructor-configured ELK Lite instance, pre-generated log files (instructor-created), alert summary template.Log forwarding is verified as working; student correctly identifies at least 80% of planted suspicious events with accurate explanations; alert summary is complete and uses the correct fields; score 75% or higher.
12Security Operations Capstone Lab: Hardening, Scanning, and Reporting18practiceStudents will independently apply the full security operations workflow — access control configuration, endpoint hardening, vulnerability scanning, and log review — to a provided lab environment and deliver a professional security posture report.
  1. Receive a lab environment with documented deficiencies; independently configure MFA, firewall rules, and endpoint hardening settings using the skills from preceding lessons, capturing all changes in a change log.
  2. Run a vulnerability scan against the hardened environment, interpret results, and produce a prioritized finding list with CVSS scores and remediation recommendations.
  3. Compile and present a professional security posture report (written and a five-minute verbal summary to the instructor) covering the controls implemented, vulnerabilities found, log anomalies identified, and overall risk posture with recommended next steps.
Full lab environment (VMs pre-configured with deliberate weaknesses), all tools used in prior lessons (OpenVAS, pfSense, OpenSSL, Wireshark, Nmap, log collector), change log template, report template.All required controls are correctly configured and verified; vulnerability scan output is accurately interpreted; report is technically accurate, professionally written, and includes all required sections; verbal summary is clear and demonstrates understanding; overall rubric score of 75% or higher required to pass the course capstone lab.
Assessments
AssessmentTypeWeightPass standardMethod & rubric
Security Operations Knowledge ExamWritten exam25%75% or higher (38 of 50 questions correct)A 50-question multiple-choice and scenario-based written exam covering all theory content from the course: defense-in-depth, IAM models, cryptography and PKI, network architecture, physical security, vulnerability scoring, and log analysis. Questions are written to the cognitive level of CompTIA Security+ and ISC2 CC exam objectives so students practice exam-style reasoning.
Standard met · Safety · Time · Quality/finish · Documentation
Practical Skills DemonstrationSkills demonstration45%Instructor rates all five task areas at Competent or above on the rubric; any Needs Improvement rating requires a repeat of that taskThe student is given 90 minutes to complete five timed tasks on a fresh lab environment: configure MFA on a user account, write and test a firewall rule set, generate and install a TLS certificate, harden at least five OS settings from a CIS Benchmark checklist, and interpret a provided vulnerability scan finding using CVSS. The instructor observes and scores each task against a standardized rubric.
Standard met · Safety · Time · Quality/finish · Documentation
Lab Log PortfolioLog15%Eight of twelve lab reports submitted and each passing report scores 75% or higher on the lab report rubric; missing or failing reports must be resubmittedStudents maintain a running portfolio of lab reports for each hands-on lesson, including screenshots, configuration details, test results, and written analysis. The portfolio is reviewed at midpoint and at course end to ensure documentation is professional, technically accurate, and complete, reflecting the kind of records kept by security operations practitioners.
Standard met · Safety · Time · Quality/finish · Documentation
Safety and Professional Conduct CheckSafety audit15%All critical items marked Satisfactory; any Unsatisfactory on a critical item (e.g., unauthorized access attempt, improper data handling, failure to follow lab rules) results in immediate remediation and re-check before the student may continue lab workThe instructor completes a structured observation checklist at three points in the course (beginning, midpoint, end) evaluating whether the student follows lab safety rules, handles credentials and sensitive data appropriately, operates only within the authorized scope of lab exercises, respects shared equipment, and maintains professional conduct consistent with workplace expectations in a security operations role.
Standard met · Safety · Time · Quality/finish · Documentation
TEC-CYBE44-04 Trade course

Linux for Cybersecurity

170 hr · $2,040 COMPLIMENTARY

Students develop hands-on proficiency with the Linux command line, file system, user management, and network configuration as applied to cybersecurity roles. Lessons cover hardening, log analysis, permissions, and scripting foundations that directly support Security+, CySA+, and ISC2 CC exam objectives. By course end, students can administer and secure a Linux system in a professional security-operations environment.

Outcomes
Course text

Students develop hands-on proficiency with the Linux command line, file system, user management, and network configuration as applied to cybersecurity roles. Lessons cover hardening, log analysis, permissions, and scripting foundations that directly support Security+, CySA+, and ISC2 CC exam objectives. By course end, students can administer and secure a Linux system in a professional security-operations environment.

How the course runs. 12 blocks: Linux Landscape and Lab Environment Setup; The Linux Command Line: Navigation and File Management; Linux File System Hierarchy and Permissions; User and Group Management; Linux Networking Fundamentals; SSH, Remote Access, and Encryption in Transit; Linux Firewall Configuration with iptables and ufw; System Services, the Boot Process, and Attack Surface Reduction; Linux Log Management and Analysis; Linux Hardening: CIS Benchmark Implementation; Introduction to Bash Scripting for Security Automation; Capstone Lab: Securing and Investigating a Linux Server.

What competent looks like. Navigate the Linux file system and execute essential shell commands to locate, inspect, and manipulate files relevant to security investigations. Configure and enforce Linux user accounts, groups, and file permissions to implement least-privilege access controls. Harden a Linux server by disabling unnecessary services, applying firewall rules with iptables/nftables, and configuring SSH securely. Analyze system logs and use standard Linux tools to detect indicators of compromise on a live host. Write and execute basic Bash scripts to automate repetitive security-administration tasks. Document system configuration and security findings in professional written reports that meet industry standards.

Lessons · 12 blocks
#LessonHrTypeObjectiveActivitiesMaterialsCheck
1Linux Landscape and Lab Environment Setup10.5labStudents install and configure a Linux virtual machine and explain the role of Linux in enterprise cybersecurity environments.
  1. Download and install VirtualBox (or VMware Workstation Player) and deploy an Ubuntu Server 22.04 LTS VM, documenting each configuration choice in a lab journal.
  2. Research and present a five-minute comparison of at least three common Linux distributions used in security (Kali, Ubuntu, CentOS/Rocky) covering package management, default shell, and typical use case.
  3. Complete a guided scavenger hunt inside the VM: locate /etc/passwd, /etc/os-release, and kernel version using uname -a, recording findings and explaining what each reveals about the system.
Workstation with VT-x/AMD-V enabled, VirtualBox 7.x or VMware Workstation Player, Ubuntu Server 22.04 LTS ISO, CompTIA Security+ Study Guide (Sybex), lab journal templateStudent's VM boots successfully, instructor verifies uname output and lab journal entries are accurate; pass = all three scavenger-hunt items correctly identified and explained in writing.
2The Linux Command Line: Navigation and File Management14.5labStudents use core shell commands to navigate the directory tree, manage files, and read file contents accurately.
  1. Complete a timed command-line drill (30 minutes) covering pwd, ls, cd, mkdir, cp, mv, rm, cat, less, head, tail, and file; instructor evaluates output captured in a script session log.
  2. Reconstruct a deliberately disorganized /home/analyst directory by sorting log files, configuration files, and evidence files into a specified hierarchy using only the command line — no GUI allowed.
  3. Use man pages and --help flags to research three unfamiliar commands chosen by the instructor; write a one-paragraph plain-language explanation of each command's security relevance.
Linux VM, terminal emulator, GNU Coreutils man pages, CompTIA Linux+ Study Guide (Sybex) chapters on file managementInstructor reviews script session log; student must execute each core command correctly with no unrecoverable errors; pass = 90% of commands produce expected output.
3Linux File System Hierarchy and Permissions14.5theoryStudents explain the Filesystem Hierarchy Standard and configure file ownership and permissions using chmod, chown, and ACLs to enforce least privilege.
  1. Draw and label the FHS directory tree (/, /etc, /var, /home, /usr, /tmp, /proc, /sys) and describe the security significance of each; peer-review with a partner.
  2. Instructor presents a misconfigured directory with world-writable system files; students identify each violation using ls -la and stat, then correct permissions using symbolic and octal chmod notation, documenting before/after states.
  3. Apply POSIX ACLs with setfacl/getfacl to grant a read-only analyst account access to /var/log without modifying group membership; verify with a second terminal logged in as that user.
Linux VM, Linux man pages (chmod, chown, setfacl), NIST SP 800-123 (Guide to General Server Security), CompTIA Security+ exam objective list (domain: Implementation)Lab worksheet requiring students to predict and verify permission bits before and after changes; pass = 85% of permission scenarios correctly resolved and documented.
4User and Group Management14.5labStudents create, modify, lock, and delete Linux user accounts and groups using standard command-line tools to support access-control policies.
  1. Simulate an onboarding scenario: receive a list of five fictional employees with defined roles; create accounts with useradd, assign to appropriate groups with usermod, set password policies with chage, and produce a written access-control record for each account.
  2. Simulate an offboarding scenario for two of those accounts: lock the accounts, expire passwords, revoke sudo access, archive the home directory, then delete accounts — capturing each command in a written runbook.
  3. Inspect /etc/passwd, /etc/shadow, and /etc/group to identify three intentionally introduced security weaknesses (e.g., UID 0 duplicate, blank password hash) and document remediation steps.
Linux VM, man pages (useradd, usermod, userdel, chage, passwd), CIS Ubuntu Linux Benchmark (Center for Internet Security), ISC2 CC domain notes on access controlInstructor audits /etc/passwd and /etc/group after each scenario; pass = all accounts match the specified policy with no extraneous privileges, and the runbook is complete and accurate.
5Linux Networking Fundamentals14.5demoStudents configure network interfaces, test connectivity, and use Linux networking tools to enumerate hosts and inspect traffic.
  1. Configure a static IP address on a VM network interface using ip addr and ip route (or nmcli on systems using NetworkManager), verify connectivity with ping and traceroute, and document the configuration in /etc/netplan or the equivalent file.
  2. Use ss and netstat to list all listening ports and established connections on the local system; identify which process owns each port using ss -tlnp; flag any ports that should not be open on a hardened server.
  3. Capture 60 seconds of network traffic with tcpdump on the VM's interface, save the capture to a .pcap file, open it in Wireshark on the host, and identify at least one DNS query and one TCP three-way handshake — annotating both in a screenshot report.
Linux VM with two virtual NICs, Wireshark installed on host, tcpdump, ip-suite tools, CompTIA Security+ Study Guide (network fundamentals chapters), ISC2 CC network concepts notesInstructor verifies static IP configuration persists after reboot and reviews annotated Wireshark screenshot report; pass = correct IP assignment, at least two open ports correctly attributed to processes, and both packet patterns correctly identified.
6SSH, Remote Access, and Encryption in Transit14.5labStudents configure OpenSSH with key-based authentication and harden the SSH daemon against common attacks to protect remote administrative access.
  1. Generate an Ed25519 SSH key pair on the host machine, copy the public key to the VM using ssh-copy-id, verify passwordless login, then demonstrate that password-based login is still possible — setting up the need for the next activity.
  2. Edit /etc/ssh/sshd_config to disable root login, disable password authentication, restrict allowed users, change the default port, and set idle session timeouts; restart sshd and verify changes take effect without locking yourself out using a second terminal session.
  3. Use fail2ban (install and configure) to block repeated failed SSH attempts; simulate brute-force attempts from a second VM using a looped ssh command, then inspect /var/log/auth.log and fail2ban-client status sshd to confirm the source IP is jailed.
Two Linux VMs on the same virtual network, OpenSSH server, fail2ban, text editor (nano/vim), CIS SSH Benchmark, CompTIA Security+ objective list (Cryptography and PKI domain)Instructor attempts password login and root login after hardening; both must fail; fail2ban jail must block the attack IP within the configured threshold; pass = all three hardening controls verified functional and /etc/ssh/sshd_config changes documented.
7Linux Firewall Configuration with iptables and ufw14.5labStudents write and apply firewall rules using ufw and iptables to control inbound and outbound traffic based on a defined security policy.
  1. Given a written security policy (allow SSH from a management subnet only, allow HTTPS from anywhere, deny all other inbound), translate the policy into ufw rules; verify with nmap from a second VM that only the intended ports are reachable.
  2. Drop to raw iptables: flush the ufw rules, implement the same policy using iptables -A INPUT/OUTPUT chains, save the ruleset with iptables-save, and explain the difference between stateless and stateful (conntrack) rule matching in a written comparison.
  3. Intentionally introduce two policy violations in the ruleset (e.g., allow Telnet inbound, allow all outbound without restriction); swap VMs with a partner who must discover and fix the violations using iptables -L and ufw status verbose, documenting each finding.
Two Linux VMs, ufw, iptables, iptables-save/restore, nmap, CompTIA Security+ Study Guide (Network Security domain), NIST SP 800-41 Rev 1 (Guidelines on Firewalls)nmap scan results from the second VM must match only the allowed ports; partner must identify and correct both violations; pass = nmap output matches policy exactly and both violations documented and remediated.
8System Services, the Boot Process, and Attack Surface Reduction14.5theoryStudents use systemd to manage services and reduce the attack surface of a Linux server by disabling unnecessary daemons and applying CIS Benchmark controls.
  1. List all running services with systemctl list-units --type=service --state=running; cross-reference against the CIS Ubuntu Linux Benchmark's list of services that should be disabled on a general-purpose server; produce a table of services to keep, disable, and investigate further.
  2. Disable at least five unnecessary services identified in the previous activity using systemctl disable --now; confirm they do not restart after a VM reboot; document each service's function and the security rationale for disabling it.
  3. Walk through the systemd boot sequence diagram provided by the instructor; identify three points in the boot process (systemd-journald, getty, network-online.target) where an attacker could achieve persistence; match each to a real-world technique from the MITRE ATT&CK framework (TA0003 Persistence).
Linux VM, systemctl, CIS Ubuntu Linux Benchmark PDF, MITRE ATT&CK website (attack.mitre.org), CompTIA CySA+ Study Guide (Threat and Vulnerability Management chapters)Instructor reviews the services table and systemctl output after reboot; pass = at least five unnecessary services correctly disabled and still off after reboot, and MITRE ATT&CK mappings are accurate.
9Linux Log Management and Analysis14.5labStudents locate, read, and analyze key Linux log files to identify security events and indicators of compromise.
  1. Map the major log files (/var/log/auth.log, syslog, kern.log, dpkg.log, fail2ban.log) to the type of security events each records; perform grep, awk, and cut exercises to extract all failed login attempts from auth.log and count unique source IPs.
  2. Instructor injects a simulated attack scenario into the VM's log files (failed SSH brute force followed by a successful login and privilege escalation); students use journalctl, grep, and sort to reconstruct the timeline of events and write a brief incident narrative.
  3. Configure rsyslog to forward a copy of auth.log entries to a second VM acting as a central syslog server; verify receipt on the server using tail -f and confirm the forwarded messages match the originals — introduce the concept of log integrity for SIEM pipelines (previewing Course 6).
Two Linux VMs, rsyslog, journalctl, grep, awk, cut, sort, CompTIA CySA+ Study Guide (Security Operations and Monitoring domain), ISC2 CC domain notes on incident responseStudents submit the incident narrative with a timestamped event timeline; pass = at least four distinct events correctly identified in sequence, each linked to the correct log source.
10Linux Hardening: CIS Benchmark Implementation14.5labStudents apply a structured subset of CIS Benchmark controls to harden a stock Ubuntu Server installation and verify compliance using a manual audit checklist.
  1. Use a provided CIS Ubuntu Linux Benchmark audit checklist (20 controls covering filesystem, services, network, logging, and account policies); audit a stock VM and record a baseline score — number of controls passed, failed, or not applicable.
  2. Remediate every failing control from the audit by editing configuration files, running commands, or modifying systemd unit files; re-run the checklist to demonstrate improvement and record the post-hardening score.
  3. Compare the stock and hardened VMs side-by-side using a structured diff of key configuration files (/etc/sysctl.conf, /etc/ssh/sshd_config, /etc/pam.d/common-password); write a two-page hardening report suitable for a client, explaining each change and its security impact.
Two Linux VMs (one stock, one being hardened), CIS Ubuntu Linux Benchmark, text editors, diff utility, NIST SP 800-123, CompTIA Security+ exam objective list (Implementation domain)Post-hardening checklist score reviewed by instructor; pass = 80% or more of the 20 controls passing, and hardening report covers all remediated controls with accurate explanations.
11Introduction to Bash Scripting for Security Automation14.5labStudents write Bash scripts that automate common security-administration tasks including user auditing, log parsing, and system health checks.
  1. Write a Bash script that reads /etc/passwd, identifies all accounts with a UID of 0, accounts with no password hash in /etc/shadow (requires sudo), and accounts that have never logged in (using lastlog); output a formatted report to a text file.
  2. Write a Bash script that accepts a log file path as an argument, parses it for failed authentication attempts, counts occurrences per IP address, and prints a ranked list to stdout — test it against a sample auth.log provided by the instructor.
  3. Extend the log-parsing script with a conditional block: if any single IP appears more than a configurable threshold (default 10), append a ufw deny rule for that IP and log the action with a timestamp to a separate audit file; test the full pipeline end-to-end.
Linux VM, bash, text editor (nano/vim), sample auth.log provided by instructor, CompTIA CySA+ Study Guide (scripting and automation sections), GNU Bash Reference ManualInstructor runs each script against a reference test set and reviews the code for logic errors and safe variable quoting; pass = scripts produce correct output on all three test cases with no syntax errors.
12Capstone Lab: Securing and Investigating a Linux Server14.5labStudents independently harden a misconfigured Linux server, investigate a simulated intrusion scenario embedded within it, and produce a professional security report.
  1. Receive a deliberately misconfigured VM image containing weak SSH settings, unnecessary services, world-writable directories, a rogue user account, and injected log entries indicating a simulated intrusion; work independently to discover all issues using tools from the full course.
  2. Apply remediation for every vulnerability found — correcting permissions, hardening SSH, disabling services, removing the rogue account, and applying firewall rules — capturing all commands in a reproducible runbook.
  3. Write and present a two-to-three-page security report structured as an executive summary, technical findings (each finding with severity, evidence, and remediation), and a conclusion; include the Bash scripts written during remediation as appendices.
Misconfigured Ubuntu Server VM image provided by instructor, all tools covered in prior lessons, report template, CompTIA Security+ and CySA+ exam objective checklists used as self-review criteriaInstructor scores report and live VM state against a rubric: vulnerability discovery (40%), correct remediation (30%), report clarity and accuracy (20%), and professional presentation (10%); pass = 75% overall with no critical vulnerability left unaddressed.
Assessments
AssessmentTypeWeightPass standardMethod & rubric
Linux Security Concepts Knowledge ExamWritten exam25%75% or higher (75 of 100 points)A 60-question multiple-choice and short-answer exam covering Linux file-system hierarchy, permissions, user management, networking, SSH hardening, firewall concepts, log files, and Bash scripting fundamentals. Questions are mapped to CompTIA Security+ (Implementation and Architecture domains), CompTIA CySA+ (Security Operations and Monitoring), and ISC2 CC (Access Controls and Network Security domains).
Standard met · Safety · Time · Quality/finish · Documentation
Hands-On Hardening Skills DemonstrationSkills demonstration45%Instructor checklist: 80% of required tasks completed correctly within 90 minutesThe student receives a freshly deployed Ubuntu Server VM and a one-page security policy; within 90 minutes they must configure SSH key authentication, disable password login, enable and configure ufw to match the policy, disable at least three unnecessary services, and set correct permissions on a specified directory — all without external reference materials beyond man pages.
Standard met · Safety · Time · Quality/finish · Documentation
Lab Journal and Runbook PortfolioLog15%All 12 lesson lab journals submitted; average rubric score of 80% across clarity, accuracy, and completeness dimensionsStudents maintain a running lab journal throughout the course documenting commands used, observed output, errors encountered, and security inferences drawn in each lesson. The portfolio is reviewed at course end for accuracy, professional writing quality, and evidence that the student connected practical steps to relevant Security+, CySA+, or ISC2 CC exam objectives.
Standard met · Safety · Time · Quality/finish · Documentation
Workplace Safety and Physical Security CheckSafety audit15%100% on all critical safety items; no critical item may be marked unsatisfactoryInstructor observes the student's workstation setup and work practices against a checklist drawn from OSHA General Industry standards and lab safety guidelines: proper cable management to prevent trip hazards, correct ergonomic monitor and keyboard positioning, awareness of electrical hazards when handling server hardware, and ability to locate and describe the lab's emergency shut-off and first-aid kit. All critical items must be satisfied; any critical failure requires immediate correction and recheck before the student may continue lab work.
Standard met · Safety · Time · Quality/finish · Documentation
TEC-CYBE44-05 Trade course

Scripting for Cybersecurity

170 hr · $2,040 COMPLIMENTARY

Students learn to write, read, and adapt scripts in Bash and Python to automate security tasks, parse logs, enumerate systems, and respond to threats. Lessons progress from syntax fundamentals through real-world security automation scenarios encountered in SOC and incident-response roles. Scripting competencies support the automation and threat-intelligence objectives tested in CompTIA Security+ and CompTIA CySA+.

Outcomes
Course text

Students learn to write, read, and adapt scripts in Bash and Python to automate security tasks, parse logs, enumerate systems, and respond to threats. Lessons progress from syntax fundamentals through real-world security automation scenarios encountered in SOC and incident-response roles. Scripting competencies support the automation and threat-intelligence objectives tested in CompTIA Security+ and CompTIA CySA+.

How the course runs. 12 blocks: Scripting in a Security Context: Purpose, Risk, and Environment Setup; Bash Fundamentals: Variables, Control Flow, and File Operations; Bash for Security: Log Parsing and User Auditing; Python Fundamentals: Syntax, Data Types, and Functions; Python File and String Handling for Log Analysis; Secure Scripting Practices: Input Validation, Least Privilege, and Credential Handling; Python Networking: Sockets, Requests, and Service Interrogation; Automating Nmap and Other CLI Security Tools with Python and Bash; Version Control with Git: Tracking and Collaborating on Security Scripts; Scripting Incident-Response Tasks: Triage Automation; Scripting for Threat Intelligence: IOC Extraction and Feed Parsing; Capstone Script Project: Automated Security Monitoring Tool.

What competent looks like. Write functional Bash and Python scripts that automate at least three distinct security tasks such as log parsing, user auditing, and network scanning. Read and explain unfamiliar scripts, identifying logic flow, data handling, and potential security risks within the code. Use Python libraries including os, subprocess, re, and requests to collect, filter, and report security-relevant data from a live Linux system. Apply safe scripting practices including input validation, least-privilege execution, and secure credential handling to all scripts produced in the course. Integrate scripts with command-line security tools such as nmap, grep, awk, and curl to build automated reconnaissance and monitoring workflows. Produce documented, version-controlled scripts stored in a local Git repository with clear README files and inline comments.

Lessons · 12 blocks
#LessonHrTypeObjectiveActivitiesMaterialsCheck
1Scripting in a Security Context: Purpose, Risk, and Environment Setup10theoryStudents explain why scripting is a core SOC skill and configure a safe, isolated lab environment for all course exercises.
  1. Instructor-led discussion: review real-world examples of both defensive scripts (automated log alerting) and offensive scripts (credential-stuffing tools) to frame dual-use risk.
  2. Students install and configure a local Ubuntu virtual machine with Python 3 and Bash available, confirming versions in a setup checklist.
  3. Reading exercise: students read CompTIA CySA+ exam objective areas covering threat intelligence and security operations automation, annotating which tasks can be scripted.
Ubuntu 22.04 LTS ISO, VirtualBox or VMware Workstation Player, CompTIA CySA+ exam objectives document (publicly available from CompTIA website), course lab guide chapter 1Students submit a completed environment-setup checklist with screenshots showing correct Python and Bash versions; instructor verifies all VMs are isolated from production networks before proceeding — 100% checklist completion required to continue.
2Bash Fundamentals: Variables, Control Flow, and File Operations14labStudents write Bash scripts that use variables, conditionals, loops, and file I/O to perform basic system tasks.
  1. Guided coding exercise: students follow instructor live-coding of a script that reads /etc/passwd, loops through each line, and prints usernames with their shell, then modify it independently.
  2. Practice set: students write three short scripts — one that checks if a file exists and reports its permissions, one that loops through a list of IP addresses and pings each, and one that appends a timestamped entry to a log file.
  3. Peer review pairs: each student reads a partner's scripts, adds inline comments explaining every major line, and flags any variables that lack input validation.
Ubuntu VM, Bash reference manual (GNU.org), VS Code editor, course lab guide chapter 2All three practice scripts execute without errors, produce correct output verified against an answer key, and include comments on every control-flow block; pass mark is 3 of 3 scripts functional with comments present.
3Bash for Security: Log Parsing and User Auditing14labStudents write Bash scripts that parse system and auth logs to extract security-relevant events and generate a plain-text audit report.
  1. Instructor demo: walkthrough of parsing /var/log/auth.log with grep, awk, and cut to isolate failed SSH login attempts by IP address.
  2. Lab exercise: students write a script that counts failed login attempts per IP from a provided sample auth.log file, sorts results descending, and flags IPs with more than ten attempts — output saved to a timestamped report file.
  3. Extension task: students add a function to the same script that cross-references flagged IPs against a local block-list file and prints BLOCKED or ALERT for each.
Ubuntu VM, sample auth.log files provided by instructor, grep/awk/sort man pages, course lab guide chapter 3, CompTIA CySA+ objectives (log analysis domain)Script correctly identifies all flagged IPs in instructor's answer-key log file, produces a readable report, and cross-references the block-list without errors; pass mark is correct identification of at least 90% of flagged IPs.
4Python Fundamentals: Syntax, Data Types, and Functions14theoryStudents write Python 3 functions that accept parameters, handle common data types, and return values, demonstrating readable code style consistent with PEP 8.
  1. Instructor-led walkthrough comparing equivalent Bash and Python snippets side-by-side so students transfer concepts rather than starting from zero.
  2. Coding drills: students complete a structured set of 10 short exercises covering strings, lists, dictionaries, for loops, while loops, and function definitions — each with an automated assert-based test to self-check.
  3. Refactoring exercise: students are given a working but poorly formatted Python script and must rename variables to be descriptive, add docstrings, and apply PEP 8 spacing rules, then explain their changes in a one-paragraph written reflection.
Ubuntu VM, Python 3 documentation (docs.python.org), PEP 8 style guide, VS Code with Pylint extension, course lab guide chapter 4Students pass all 10 automated assert tests and submit a refactored script with docstrings and PEP 8-compliant formatting confirmed by Pylint score of 7.0 or higher; both conditions required to pass.
5Python File and String Handling for Log Analysis14labStudents use Python's built-in file I/O and the re module to parse structured and semi-structured log files and extract indicators of compromise.
  1. Instructor demo: open a web server access log in Python, read line by line, use re.search to extract HTTP status codes and source IPs, and write matching lines to an output file.
  2. Lab exercise: students write a Python script that reads a provided Apache access log, extracts all unique source IP addresses returning HTTP 404 responses, counts occurrences, and writes a CSV report with columns IP, count, first_seen, last_seen.
  3. Challenge: students extend the script to accept the log file path and a threshold count as command-line arguments using argparse, so the tool is reusable without editing the source.
Ubuntu VM, Python 3 re and argparse module documentation, sample Apache access log files, VS Code, course lab guide chapter 5Script produces a CSV that matches the instructor answer-key CSV within a 5% margin on counts (accounting for tie-breaking sort differences), accepts command-line arguments, and exits cleanly on a missing file with an informative error message; all three criteria required to pass.
6Secure Scripting Practices: Input Validation, Least Privilege, and Credential Handling12theoryStudents identify insecure scripting patterns and rewrite vulnerable code snippets to eliminate command injection, hard-coded credentials, and overly broad file permissions.
  1. Case-study analysis: students examine three deliberately flawed scripts (one with a shell-injection vulnerability via unsanitized user input, one with a hard-coded API key, one that runs as root unnecessarily) and write a one-paragraph risk explanation for each.
  2. Remediation exercise: students fix each of the three flawed scripts using subprocess with a list argument instead of shell=True, environment variables or a secrets file with restricted permissions for credentials, and a privilege-drop pattern.
  3. Group discussion: class reviews OSHA General Duty Clause applicability to IT safety and discusses physical and ergonomic hazards in a SOC environment (extended screen time, cable management, electrical safety), reinforcing Safety+ principles from course 1.
Flawed script handouts (instructor-prepared), Python subprocess and os module docs, OSHA 29 CFR 1910 General Industry standards (general reference), course lab guide chapter 6All three remediated scripts pass a manual instructor code review confirming no shell=True on user-supplied input, no plaintext credentials in source, and no unnecessary root execution; all three must pass for credit.
7Python Networking: Sockets, Requests, and Service Interrogation14labStudents write Python scripts that use the socket and requests libraries to probe network services and retrieve HTTP-based threat-intelligence data within an isolated lab network.
  1. Instructor demo: write a simple TCP port scanner using Python sockets that accepts a target IP and port range, attempts connections with a timeout, and prints open/closed results — emphasizing that this is run only against lab VMs the student owns.
  2. Lab exercise: students build on the demo to produce a multi-threaded port scanner using threading.Thread that scans ports 1–1024 on a provided lab target VM, records open ports, and saves results to a JSON file.
  3. API integration exercise: students write a Python script that reads a list of IP addresses from a file, submits each to the AbuseIPDB or VirusTotal public API (using a free account key stored as an environment variable), and appends the abuse-confidence score to a results CSV.
Ubuntu VM, isolated lab network with designated target VM, Python 3 socket and requests documentation, free AbuseIPDB API account, course lab guide chapter 7, CompTIA CySA+ objectives (threat intelligence domain)Port scanner correctly identifies all open ports on the lab target (verified against instructor's known-open-ports list), saves valid JSON, and the API script appends scores without crashing on an unreachable IP; 100% of known-open ports must be found, API script must handle errors gracefully.
8Automating Nmap and Other CLI Security Tools with Python and Bash14labStudents write scripts that invoke nmap and other CLI security tools as subprocesses, parse their output, and produce structured reports.
  1. Instructor demo: run nmap with XML output (-oX) against a lab target from a Python script using subprocess.run, then parse the XML with Python's xml.etree.ElementTree to extract host status and open port information.
  2. Lab exercise: students build a Bash wrapper script that calls nmap on a subnet, calls nikto against each discovered web server (ports 80 and 443), and aggregates both outputs into a single timestamped directory with an index file listing all results.
  3. Documentation exercise: students write a README.md for their wrapper script including purpose, prerequisites, usage syntax with examples, and a known-limitations section — stored in a local Git repository with at least three commits showing iterative development.
Ubuntu VM, nmap, nikto, Git, VS Code, Python xml.etree.ElementTree docs, course lab guide chapter 8, CompTIA Security+ objectives (network scanning and enumeration)Python script correctly extracts host and port data from nmap XML matching instructor answer key; Bash wrapper produces the indexed directory structure; Git log shows at least three commits; pass requires all three elements.
9Version Control with Git: Tracking and Collaborating on Security Scripts10demoStudents use Git from the command line to initialize repositories, commit changes, create branches, and resolve a simulated merge conflict in a security-script project.
  1. Instructor-led walkthrough of git init, git add, git commit, git log, git branch, git checkout, and git merge using a sample script repository on the projector screen.
  2. Hands-on exercise: each student creates a local Git repository for their course scripts, writes a .gitignore that excludes files containing API keys (e.g., secrets.env), and makes at least five meaningful commits with descriptive messages.
  3. Simulated collaboration: students are given a repository with a deliberate merge conflict in a Python script and must resolve it manually using a text editor, then verify the resolved file runs correctly before committing the fix.
Ubuntu VM, Git documentation (git-scm.com), course lab guide chapter 9Student repository has at least five commits with non-trivial commit messages, a correct .gitignore, and the resolved-conflict commit produces a runnable script confirmed by instructor; all three required to pass.
10Scripting Incident-Response Tasks: Triage Automation16labStudents write a Python triage script that collects volatile system data from a live Linux host — running processes, active network connections, logged-in users, and recent auth events — and writes a time-stamped forensic snapshot report.
  1. Class discussion: review what volatile data is lost on reboot and why scripted collection order matters (RAM artifacts, then process list, then network, then disk), connecting to incident-response procedures from course 7 preview.
  2. Lab exercise: students write a Python script using os, subprocess, and datetime that runs ps aux, ss -tulnp, who, and tail of auth.log, captures each output with a UTC timestamp, and writes everything to a structured plain-text report file named with the hostname and timestamp.
  3. Red-team/blue-team scenario: instructor plants a netcat listener on a lab VM; students run their triage script against it and must identify the suspicious listening port in their report, demonstrating that the script captures actionable data.
Ubuntu lab VM (with planted netcat listener), Python 3 docs, ss/ps/who man pages, course lab guide chapter 10, CompTIA CySA+ objectives (incident response domain)Report file is produced with UTC timestamps, contains output from all four commands, and correctly includes the planted netcat listener in the network-connections section; all three criteria required to pass.
11Scripting for Threat Intelligence: IOC Extraction and Feed Parsing16labStudents write a Python script that extracts indicators of compromise (IP addresses, domains, and file hashes) from unstructured threat-report text using regular expressions and enriches each IOC with data from a public threat-intelligence feed.
  1. Instructor demo: use re.findall with patterns for IPv4 addresses, domain names, and MD5/SHA256 hashes to extract IOCs from a plain-text threat report, printing results to stdout.
  2. Lab exercise: students write a complete IOC-extraction script that accepts a text file argument, extracts all three IOC types into separate lists, deduplicates them, and writes a JSON file with keys ips, domains, hashes and their respective arrays.
  3. Enrichment extension: students add a function that submits each extracted IP to the AbuseIPDB API and appends the returned abuse score to each IP entry in the JSON output, handling rate-limit errors with a retry after a short sleep.
Ubuntu VM, Python 3 re and json module docs, sample threat-report text files provided by instructor, free AbuseIPDB API account, course lab guide chapter 11, CompTIA CySA+ objectives (threat intelligence domain)JSON output matches instructor answer key for all three IOC types with correct deduplication, and the enrichment function handles a simulated rate-limit error (HTTP 429) without crashing; both required to pass.
12Capstone Script Project: Automated Security Monitoring Tool22practiceStudents design, build, test, document, and present an integrated Python or Bash security-monitoring tool that combines at least four skills from the course into a single working program.
  1. Design phase (first session): students submit a one-page project proposal specifying the tool's purpose, the four or more course skills it integrates, required inputs and outputs, and a Git repository structure plan — instructor approves or requests revision before coding begins.
  2. Build and test phase (second and third sessions): students write the tool incrementally with Git commits at each functional milestone, run the tool against provided lab data, fix bugs, write a README with usage instructions, and record a short screen-capture demo of the tool running successfully.
  3. Defense phase (final session): each student presents their tool to the class for 8–10 minutes — walking through the code, demonstrating live output, and answering instructor questions about design decisions, security considerations, and one improvement they would make given more time.
Ubuntu VM, all course lab tools and libraries, Git, VS Code, screen-recording software (OBS or equivalent), course lab guide chapter 12, rubric provided to students at project startTool meets all rubric criteria: runs without errors on instructor's test data, integrates at least four course skills, repository has meaningful commits and a complete README, and student can answer three instructor questions about the code during the defense; all criteria must be met to pass.
Assessments
AssessmentTypeWeightPass standardMethod & rubric
Scripting Concepts Knowledge ExamWritten exam25%70% or higher on all sections; no individual section below 60%A 50-question written exam covering Bash and Python syntax, secure scripting principles, regular expressions, file I/O, networking concepts, and version control, with multiple-choice and short-answer questions mapped to CompTIA Security+ (automation and scripting) and CompTIA CySA+ (threat intelligence and security operations) exam objective areas.
Standard met · Safety · Time · Quality/finish · Documentation
Live Scripting Skills DemonstrationSkills demonstration45%Student must complete at least 3 of 4 tasks fully within 90 minutes with no critical errors such as shell injection vulnerabilities or hard-coded credentialsIn a proctored lab session, each student receives four scripting tasks they have not seen before — drawn from the categories of log parsing, network interrogation, IOC extraction, and triage automation — and must produce working, commented, secure scripts for each task on their Ubuntu VM.
Standard met · Safety · Time · Quality/finish · Documentation
Course Lab Log PortfolioLog15%All 10 required lab entries present, each with objective, script code, sample output, and a 2–3 sentence reflection; average reflection quality rated Meets Standard or above on rubricStudents maintain a running lab log throughout the course documenting each major lab exercise, including the script they wrote, sample output, any errors encountered and how they fixed them, and a brief reflection on what the skill means in a real SOC role — submitted as a single PDF or Markdown document from their Git repository.
Standard met · Safety · Time · Quality/finish · Documentation
Safe Scripting and Lab Safety CheckSafety audit15%Zero critical failures (hard-coded credentials, shell injection, or running scripts with unnecessary root on the assessment tasks); minor findings must be corrected within 10 minutesInstructor performs a targeted code review and lab observation checksheet evaluating whether the student consistently applies input validation, avoids shell=True with user-supplied data, stores credentials outside source code, and follows physical lab safety practices including proper cable management and ergonomic workstation setup as introduced in course 1.
Standard met · Safety · Time · Quality/finish · Documentation
TEC-CYBE44-06 Trade course

Security Information and Event Management (SIEM)

170 hr · $2,040 COMPLIMENTARY

Students learn to deploy, configure, and operate SIEM platforms to collect, normalize, correlate, and alert on security events across an enterprise environment. Hands-on labs use industry-representative tooling to build dashboards, tune detection rules, and investigate alerts through a structured analyst workflow. Lesson content maps directly to CompTIA Security+ (domain: Security Operations) and CompTIA CySA+ (domains: Security Operations, Vulnerability Management, Incident Response) exam objectives.

Outcomes
Course text

Students learn to deploy, configure, and operate SIEM platforms to collect, normalize, correlate, and alert on security events across an enterprise environment. Hands-on labs use industry-representative tooling to build dashboards, tune detection rules, and investigate alerts through a structured analyst workflow. Lesson content maps directly to CompTIA Security+ (domain: Security Operations) and CompTIA CySA+ (domains: Security Operations, Vulnerability Management, Incident Response) exam objectives.

How the course runs. 12 blocks: SIEM Fundamentals and the Security Operations Workflow; Log Sources, Data Collection, and Normalization; Searching, Filtering, and Query Languages; Dashboards, Visualizations, and Reporting; Correlation Rules and Use-Case Development; MITRE ATT&CK Framework and Alert Mapping; Threat Intelligence Integration; Alert Triage and Investigation Workflow; Log Retention, Data Privacy, and Responsible Handling; SIEM Health Monitoring and Performance Tuning; Capstone Scenario: End-to-End SIEM Investigation; Exam Alignment Review: SIEM Topics in Security+ and CySA+.

What competent looks like. Configure a SIEM platform to ingest and parse log sources including Windows event logs, Linux syslogs, firewall logs, and web server logs. Write and tune correlation rules to detect common attack patterns such as brute-force, lateral movement, and data exfiltration with a measurable reduction in false positives. Build dashboards and scheduled reports that communicate security posture to both technical and non-technical audiences. Investigate a SIEM-generated alert end-to-end using a repeatable triage workflow, document findings, and escalate or close the ticket with written justification. Demonstrate safe and responsible handling of sensitive log data in compliance with data-retention and least-privilege principles. Map SIEM alert categories to the MITRE ATT&CK framework and identify relevant tactics, techniques, and procedures (TTPs).

Lessons · 12 blocks
#LessonHrTypeObjectiveActivitiesMaterialsCheck
1SIEM Fundamentals and the Security Operations Workflow10theoryStudents explain the architecture and core functions of a SIEM platform and describe how SIEM fits within a security operations center (SOC) workflow.
  1. Annotated diagram exercise: students label a SIEM architecture diagram identifying log collectors, indexers, search heads, and correlation engines, then explain each component in writing.
  2. Paired reading and discussion of a publicly available SOC analyst job description and a SIEM vendor data sheet (e.g., Elastic Security or Splunk Free Trial documentation); students list five real analyst tasks that depend on SIEM data.
  3. Class mapping activity: students place six common SOC alert types (failed login, malware detection, data exfiltration, port scan, privilege escalation, beaconing) onto a simplified incident lifecycle diagram and describe what SIEM role each step requires.
Whiteboard/projection, annotated SIEM architecture handout, SOC analyst job posting printouts, Splunk or Elastic Security free-tier documentation, CompTIA CySA+ official study guide (Security Operations chapter)Exit quiz of 10 multiple-choice questions covering SIEM components, SOC tiers, and alert lifecycle; pass mark 70%.
2Log Sources, Data Collection, and Normalization16labStudents configure at least four distinct log sources to forward data to a SIEM instance and verify that each source is parsed and normalized correctly.
  1. Lab: Install a lightweight forwarder (e.g., Elastic Beats or Splunk Universal Forwarder) on a Windows VM and a Linux VM; confirm event ingestion by running a search for host-specific events in the SIEM UI.
  2. Lab: Configure syslog forwarding from a simulated firewall (pfSense or an equivalent open-source appliance in a virtual lab) and a web server (Apache) to the SIEM; verify that source IP, destination IP, timestamp, and action fields parse correctly into the common schema.
  3. Normalization review exercise: given three raw log samples with inconsistent timestamp formats, students write or modify a field-extraction rule (regex or grok pattern) to standardize the timestamp field, then validate in the SIEM search interface.
Virtual lab environment (VirtualBox or VMware Workstation), Windows Server 2019 VM, Ubuntu Server VM, pfSense VM, Apache web server, Splunk Free or Elastic Stack (free tier), Elastic Beats or Splunk Universal Forwarder installers, CySA+ study guide (log management chapter)Instructor verifies all four log sources appear in the SIEM with correct field parsing; students submit a one-page configuration log documenting each source and the verification search used. Pass = all four sources ingesting with zero unparsed critical fields.
3Searching, Filtering, and Query Languages14labStudents write targeted SIEM queries using the platform's search language to retrieve specific event sets, filter noise, and calculate basic statistics.
  1. Guided practice: instructor demonstrates five foundational query patterns (keyword search, field filter, time-range filter, stats/count by field, top N values) using live data; students replicate each query on their own instance.
  2. Query challenge: students receive a list of eight investigative questions (e.g., 'Which source IP generated the most failed SSH logins in the last 24 hours?') and must write a working query answering each one; queries are submitted as a query log.
  3. Error-correction exercise: students receive six intentionally broken queries and must identify and fix the syntax error in each, explaining the mistake in a comment line.
SIEM instance with pre-loaded sample dataset (BOTS dataset v3 or equivalent open-source security dataset), query language reference card (SPL or KQL/Lucene depending on platform), lab workbookStudents submit the query log with all eight investigative queries returning correct results; instructor spot-checks three queries live. Pass = 6 of 8 queries return accurate, relevant results.
4Dashboards, Visualizations, and Reporting12practiceStudents build a multi-panel SIEM dashboard with at least five visualizations and generate a scheduled summary report suitable for a SOC manager audience.
  1. Step-by-step dashboard build: students create panels for top talkers (source IPs by event volume), authentication failures over time (line chart), geographic source map, alert severity distribution (pie chart), and a single-value panel showing total events ingested in 24 hours.
  2. Report configuration exercise: students set up a scheduled PDF report that runs daily and emails a summary of the previous day's top-10 alert types; students document the schedule, recipient field, and time range settings in a lab notebook entry.
  3. Peer review: pairs of students swap dashboards and evaluate each other against a provided rubric (accuracy of data, clarity of labels, appropriate chart type for each metric); written feedback returned to author.
SIEM instance, sample security dataset, dashboard/report rubric handout, lab notebook (digital or paper)Instructor reviews completed dashboard against rubric: five panels present, data accurate, labels clear, report scheduled. Pass = 4 of 5 panels meet rubric criteria with no data errors.
5Correlation Rules and Use-Case Development16labStudents write, test, and document three correlation rules that detect defined attack behaviors and generate actionable alerts without excessive false positives.
  1. Guided rule build: instructor walks through creating a brute-force detection rule (threshold: more than a defined number of failed logins from one source IP within a short time window); students replicate and then adjust the threshold to observe the effect on alert volume.
  2. Independent rule development: students design and implement two additional rules from a provided list of use cases (options include: new admin account created after hours, outbound connection to known malicious IP from threat feed, USB device inserted on a sensitive host); each rule must include a description, logic, severity, and suppression condition.
  3. False-positive tuning exercise: instructor injects legitimate bulk-authentication traffic (e.g., a scheduled backup service) into the dataset; students identify the false positive in their brute-force rule and add a whitelist or exception condition to suppress it, documenting the change.
SIEM instance, sample attack traffic PCAP replayed via a log injector, threat intelligence IP list (open-source, e.g., abuse.ch), rule-writing worksheet, CySA+ study guide (detection and analytics chapter)Each of three submitted rules fires on injected attack traffic and does NOT fire on the injected benign traffic; documentation complete. Pass = all three rules meet both criteria with written tuning notes.
6MITRE ATT&CK Framework and Alert Mapping12theoryStudents map at least ten SIEM alert types to specific MITRE ATT&CK tactics and techniques and explain how the framework guides detection strategy.
  1. Framework familiarization: students navigate the MITRE ATT&CK Navigator (online tool) to locate five techniques relevant to the correlation rules they built in the previous lesson and document the Tactic, Technique ID, and a one-sentence description for each.
  2. Alert-to-ATT&CK mapping table: students receive a list of twenty SIEM alert names (e.g., 'Kerberoasting attempt,' 'Living-off-the-land binary execution,' 'Credential dumping via LSASS') and complete a mapping table identifying the ATT&CK tactic and technique for each.
  3. Detection gap analysis: using the ATT&CK Navigator heat-map feature, students color-code their three existing correlation rules against the full matrix and identify at least two tactic areas with no current coverage, then propose a new rule for one gap in a short written brief.
MITRE ATT&CK Navigator (att&ck.mitre.org, online), ATT&CK mapping worksheet, projector for instructor demo, CySA+ official study guide (threat intelligence chapter)Completed mapping table reviewed by instructor; at least 8 of 10 mappings correct, detection gap brief submitted. Pass = 80% mapping accuracy plus submitted brief.
7Threat Intelligence Integration12labStudents integrate an open-source threat intelligence feed into the SIEM and configure an alert rule that fires when internal hosts communicate with indicators of compromise (IOCs) from that feed.
  1. Feed ingestion lab: students download a current open-source IP reputation list (e.g., abuse.ch Feodo Tracker) in CSV format, import it into the SIEM as a lookup table, and write a search query that cross-references firewall destination IP logs against the list.
  2. IOC alert rule: students build a correlation rule that triggers a high-severity alert when any internal host initiates an outbound connection to an IP on the imported threat list; rule is tested by injecting a simulated firewall log entry matching a known IOC.
  3. IOC lifecycle discussion and written response: students read a one-page scenario describing stale IOCs causing alert fatigue; they write a half-page response outlining a process for regularly refreshing the threat feed and expiring outdated indicators.
SIEM instance, abuse.ch Feodo Tracker CSV (public, free), firewall log sample dataset, lab workbook, CySA+ study guide (threat intelligence and vulnerability management chapters)Rule fires on injected IOC log entry; rule does not fire on clean log entries; lookup table shows current feed date. Written response submitted. Pass = rule functions correctly AND written response addresses feed refresh and expiry.
8Alert Triage and Investigation Workflow16practiceStudents follow a defined triage workflow to investigate a SIEM alert from initial notification through containment recommendation, producing a structured investigation ticket.
  1. Workflow walkthrough: instructor demonstrates triage of a pre-staged brute-force alert using a five-step process (confirm the alert, scope affected assets, gather supporting evidence, determine impact, recommend action); students take annotated notes and complete a blank triage template alongside the demo.
  2. Guided investigation: students receive a pre-staged alert (lateral movement scenario with failed and successful logins across multiple hosts) and independently complete the five-step triage, using SIEM search to gather pivot evidence (parent process, user account history, network connections); findings documented in the triage template.
  3. Escalation decision exercise: students receive three completed triage summaries (one true positive requiring escalation, one true positive manageable at Tier 1, one false positive); they must classify each and write a two-sentence justification for each decision.
SIEM instance with pre-staged multi-event scenario dataset, triage template (provided), investigation ticket template (modeled on a simple ticketing system form), CySA+ study guide (incident response chapter)Instructor reviews completed triage ticket for the guided investigation: all five steps present, at least three supporting evidence items cited from SIEM searches, and a clear containment recommendation. Pass = all five steps completed with cited evidence.
9Log Retention, Data Privacy, and Responsible Handling10theoryStudents describe legal and organizational considerations for log data retention, access control, and privacy and apply least-privilege principles to a SIEM role configuration.
  1. Case study reading and discussion: students read a summary of a real publicly reported case involving mishandled employee log data; they identify what went wrong and what controls (access control, audit logging of SIEM access, data masking) would have mitigated the issue.
  2. Role-based access control (RBAC) configuration lab: students set up three SIEM user roles (read-only analyst, Tier 2 analyst with rule-editing rights, and admin) using the SIEM's built-in access management; they verify each role by logging in as each user and confirming permitted and restricted actions.
  3. Retention policy worksheet: students draft a one-page retention policy for a fictional mid-size company specifying log categories, retention periods (using generally accepted industry guidance rather than specific statutory citations), storage tier, and deletion procedures.
SIEM instance with user management module, case study handout (instructor-prepared from public sources), retention policy worksheet template, CompTIA Security+ study guide (governance and compliance chapter)RBAC configuration verified by instructor test login for each role; retention policy worksheet submitted and reviewed for completeness. Pass = all three roles configured correctly AND policy addresses all four required fields.
10SIEM Health Monitoring and Performance Tuning12labStudents monitor SIEM platform health metrics, identify an ingestion bottleneck in a simulated scenario, and apply a documented fix to restore normal indexing rates.
  1. Health dashboard review: students navigate to the SIEM's built-in monitoring interface (e.g., Splunk Monitoring Console or Elastic Stack Monitoring) and identify the key metrics: indexing rate, search load, disk usage, and forwarder connection status; they document baseline values in a lab notebook entry.
  2. Fault injection exercise: instructor deliberately throttles a forwarder or introduces a misconfigured index to create a simulated ingestion gap; students must identify the gap using health dashboards and search for missing data, then document the symptom and the diagnostic steps taken.
  3. Remediation and change documentation: students apply the corrective action (fix the forwarder config or index setting), verify that indexing resumes at baseline rates, and complete a short change record documenting the problem, cause, fix, and verification step.
SIEM instance with monitoring module enabled, virtual lab environment, lab notebook, change record templateStudents submit the change record; instructor confirms indexing rate returned to baseline and the change record includes all four required fields. Pass = rate restored AND all four fields completed.
11Capstone Scenario: End-to-End SIEM Investigation24labStudents independently configure a SIEM environment, detect a multi-stage simulated attack using correlation rules and manual investigation, and produce a complete analyst report documenting the incident.
  1. Environment setup: students deploy log sources (Windows event logs, Linux auth logs, firewall logs, web logs) to a clean SIEM instance, verify ingestion, and activate at least three previously built correlation rules — all within a defined setup period at the start of the capstone session.
  2. Attack playback and investigation: instructor injects a pre-built multi-stage attack dataset (reconnaissance scan → credential brute-force → successful login → lateral movement → data staging) without telling students which stages are present; students must discover, triage, and document each stage using SIEM search and dashboards.
  3. Written analyst report: students produce a structured report (executive summary, timeline of events, affected assets, evidence citations from SIEM queries, ATT&CK technique IDs, and containment/remediation recommendations) and deliver a five-minute verbal debrief to the instructor.
SIEM instance, capstone attack dataset (instructor-prepared), analyst report template, ATT&CK Navigator, triage templateReport graded against rubric: all five stages of the attack identified, each stage supported by at least one cited SIEM query, ATT&CK IDs correct, recommendations actionable. Pass = 4 of 5 stages correctly identified with cited evidence AND report submitted on time.
12Exam Alignment Review: SIEM Topics in Security+ and CySA+16theoryStudents connect each major SIEM skill practiced in the course to the corresponding Security+ and CySA+ exam objective and complete a timed practice question set at or above passing standard.
  1. Objective mapping activity: students receive a printed list of Security+ and CySA+ exam objectives related to SIEM, log analysis, threat detection, and incident response; they annotate each objective with the lesson number and a specific lab activity from this course that addressed it, creating a personal study map.
  2. Vocabulary and concept review: students complete a matching exercise of 25 key SIEM terms (normalization, correlation rule, RBAC, IOC, retention policy, false positive, etc.) with definitions, then self-score and review missed items with a partner.
  3. Timed practice question set: students complete 40 multiple-choice and performance-based scenario questions drawn from Security+ (Security Operations domain) and CySA+ (Security Operations, Incident Response domains) objectives; questions are reviewed as a group after submission, with instructor explanation of each correct answer and the exam objective it tests.
CompTIA Security+ and CySA+ official exam objective lists (downloaded from CompTIA.org), practice question bank (instructor-curated or commercial exam prep resource), vocabulary matching worksheetPractice question set scored immediately; students scoring below 75% must schedule a review session with the instructor before the course knowledge exam. Pass threshold noted for transition to Course 10 exam prep.
Assessments
AssessmentTypeWeightPass standardMethod & rubric
SIEM Knowledge ExamWritten exam25%70% correct (28 of 40 questions)A 40-question multiple-choice and scenario-based exam covering SIEM architecture, log normalization, query language concepts, correlation rule logic, MITRE ATT&CK mapping, threat intelligence integration, data retention principles, and platform health monitoring. Questions are written to Security+ and CySA+ exam-style difficulty and format.
Standard met · Safety · Time · Quality/finish · Documentation
Alert Triage Skills DemonstrationSkills demonstration45%All five triage steps completed with cited SIEM evidence; containment recommendation rated as reasonable by instructorThe student receives a live SIEM alert in a fresh scenario not used during instruction and must complete the five-step triage workflow within 45 minutes, producing a filled investigation ticket and delivering a two-minute verbal summary of findings. The instructor uses a scored rubric covering completeness, evidence quality, accuracy of ATT&CK mapping, and appropriateness of the recommended action.
Standard met · Safety · Time · Quality/finish · Documentation
Lab Log PortfolioLog15%At least 10 of 12 lessons represented with complete entries; all three correlation rules documented and functionalStudents maintain a running lab log (digital or paper) throughout the course capturing configuration steps, query syntax used, screenshots of key results, tuning decisions, and change records. The complete portfolio is submitted at the end of the course and reviewed for accuracy, completeness, and evidence that the student independently performed each lab task.
Standard met · Safety · Time · Quality/finish · Documentation
Data Handling and Access Control Safety CheckSafety audit15%All four RBAC roles verified correct; retention policy contains all required fields; student can verbally explain the purpose of each control without promptingThe instructor conducts a brief practical check by logging into the SIEM as each of the three user roles the student configured and confirming permitted and restricted actions match the defined role; the student's written retention policy is reviewed for completeness; and the instructor asks three oral questions about why these controls matter for privacy and compliance. This check must be passed before the student may proceed to the Incident Response course.
Standard met · Safety · Time · Quality/finish · Documentation
TEC-CYBE44-07 Trade course

Incident Response

170 hr · $2,040 COMPLIMENTARY

Students learn to detect, contain, eradicate, and recover from cybersecurity incidents using industry-standard frameworks and tools. The course covers the full incident response lifecycle, digital forensics fundamentals, and post-incident reporting aligned to CompTIA Security+ and CySA+ exam domains. Hands-on labs simulate realistic breach scenarios so students can practice triage, evidence handling, and stakeholder communication under time pressure.

Outcomes
Course text

Students learn to detect, contain, eradicate, and recover from cybersecurity incidents using industry-standard frameworks and tools. The course covers the full incident response lifecycle, digital forensics fundamentals, and post-incident reporting aligned to CompTIA Security+ and CySA+ exam domains. Hands-on labs simulate realistic breach scenarios so students can practice triage, evidence handling, and stakeholder communication under time pressure.

How the course runs. 12 blocks: Incident Response Fundamentals and NIST SP 800-61 Lifecycle; Preparation: Building an Incident Response Plan and Team; Detection and Analysis: Log Review and Alert Triage; Digital Forensics Principles and Evidence Handling; Memory and Disk Imaging Lab; Containment Strategies: Network Isolation and System Quarantine; Malware Analysis Basics and Eradication; Recovery Procedures and System Restoration; Legal, Regulatory, and Notification Requirements; Incident Documentation and Post-Incident Reporting; Threat Intelligence Integration and IOC Sharing; Full Incident Response Simulation Capstone Lab.

What competent looks like. Execute a structured incident response process following the NIST SP 800-61 lifecycle phases: preparation, detection and analysis, containment/eradication/recovery, and post-incident activity. Collect and preserve digital evidence using accepted forensic procedures that maintain chain of custody. Use SIEM alerts, log analysis, and endpoint telemetry to classify and prioritize security incidents. Apply containment and eradication techniques—including network isolation, malware removal, and credential resets—without destroying evidence. Produce a complete incident report and lessons-learned document suitable for technical and executive audiences. Identify legal, regulatory, and notification obligations that apply when a breach involves personal or regulated data.

Lessons · 12 blocks
#LessonHrTypeObjectiveActivitiesMaterialsCheck
1Incident Response Fundamentals and NIST SP 800-61 Lifecycle12theoryStudents will be able to describe each phase of the NIST SP 800-61 incident response lifecycle and explain how it maps to real-world security events.
  1. Read and annotate NIST SP 800-61 Rev. 2 sections on preparation, detection, containment, eradication, recovery, and post-incident; create a phase-by-phase summary card.
  2. Watch instructor-led walkthrough of three historical breach timelines (ransomware, insider threat, web application compromise) and map each event to its lifecycle phase on a whiteboard diagram.
  3. Group discussion: compare NIST 800-61 to SANS PICERL (Preparation, Identification, Containment, Eradication, Recovery, Lessons Learned) and document similarities and differences in a one-page comparison table.
NIST SP 800-61 Rev. 2 (free PDF), SANS Incident Handler's Handbook, whiteboard, slide deck, student notebooksQuiz of 20 multiple-choice questions covering lifecycle phases, definitions, and roles; passing score 75%.
2Preparation: Building an Incident Response Plan and Team14theoryStudents will draft a functional incident response plan (IRP) that defines roles, communication channels, escalation paths, and asset inventory requirements.
  1. Review two sample IRPs (one small business, one enterprise) and use a provided rubric to identify gaps in scope, roles, and communication procedures.
  2. In pairs, assign RACI roles (Responsible, Accountable, Consulted, Informed) to a simulated incident response team of eight people using a role-card exercise.
  3. Draft a one-page IRP template for a fictional mid-size retailer, including severity classification tiers, on-call escalation tree, and a communication matrix listing internal and external contacts.
Sample IRP documents, NIST SP 800-61 Rev. 2, role cards, RACI matrix template, word processorInstructor evaluation of completed IRP draft against a 10-point rubric; minimum score 7/10, covering scope, roles, escalation, and communication matrix.
3Detection and Analysis: Log Review and Alert Triage16labStudents will analyze firewall, endpoint, and authentication logs to identify indicators of compromise (IOCs) and correctly classify incident severity.
  1. Import provided log sets into a Splunk or Elastic SIEM instance and write basic search queries to surface failed logins, outbound connections to known-bad IPs, and large data transfers.
  2. Use a pre-built alert dashboard to triage 15 simulated alerts, labeling each as true positive, false positive, or benign anomaly, and record justification in a triage worksheet.
  3. Apply a severity classification matrix (Critical/High/Medium/Low) to five scenario descriptions and defend classifications in a brief oral check with the instructor.
Splunk Free or Elastic Stack (lab VMs), sample log files (Windows Event, Syslog, firewall), IOC reference list, triage worksheet template, severity classification matrixTriage worksheet scored by instructor: correctly classify at least 12 of 15 alerts (80%) with written justification; oral severity defense rated satisfactory or above.
4Digital Forensics Principles and Evidence Handling14theoryStudents will explain the legal and procedural requirements for collecting, preserving, and documenting digital evidence so that chain of custody is maintained.
  1. Read assigned sections from NIST SP 800-86 (Guide to Integrating Forensic Techniques) and create a flowchart showing proper evidence collection order (live memory, then disk image, then logs).
  2. Role-play an evidence intake scenario: one student acts as first responder, another as evidence custodian; practice completing a chain-of-custody form for a seized laptop and USB drive.
  3. Class debate: discuss scenarios where live forensics must take priority over traditional 'power-off and image' procedures, producing a one-paragraph written rationale for each scenario.
NIST SP 800-86 (free PDF), blank chain-of-custody forms, sample case study handouts, whiteboardCompleted chain-of-custody form evaluated against a checklist of 8 required fields; all 8 fields must be correctly completed to pass.
5Memory and Disk Imaging Lab16labStudents will perform a live memory capture and a bit-for-bit disk image on a lab virtual machine using industry-standard forensic tools, then verify image integrity with a hash.
  1. Use Volatility Foundation's Volatility 3 to capture and analyze a memory dump from a Windows lab VM: identify running processes, network connections, and injected code artifacts.
  2. Use Autopsy or FTK Imager (free edition) to create a forensic image of a provided virtual disk, generate MD5 and SHA-256 hashes, and document the acquisition in a written acquisition log.
  3. Compare the acquired image hash to the hash of the original disk to confirm integrity, then write a two-paragraph summary explaining why hash verification is a legal and procedural requirement.
Volatility 3, Autopsy (open-source), FTK Imager Lite, lab VMs (Windows 10/11), USB drives for image storage, acquisition log templateInstructor reviews acquisition log and hash verification output; image hash must match original and log must contain all required fields; pass = all fields complete and hashes match.
6Containment Strategies: Network Isolation and System Quarantine14demoStudents will demonstrate at least three containment techniques—network isolation, firewall rule insertion, and endpoint quarantine—without destroying forensic evidence.
  1. Instructor demonstrates isolating an infected VM from the network using virtual switch settings in VMware or VirtualBox while preserving live memory state; students replicate the procedure in their own lab environment.
  2. Students configure a host-based firewall rule on a Windows lab VM to block all outbound traffic to a simulated command-and-control IP range, then verify the block using a connection test.
  3. Practice 'partial containment' on a web server scenario: block the attacker's source IP at the perimeter firewall rule while keeping the server online for business continuity; document the trade-off decision in writing.
VMware Workstation Player or VirtualBox, Windows Server lab VM, pfSense or simulated firewall console, student lab guides, documentation templateStep-by-step competency checklist signed off by instructor: student must successfully complete isolation, rule insertion, and quarantine steps with no evidence destruction; all three steps must pass.
7Malware Analysis Basics and Eradication14labStudents will perform static and basic dynamic analysis of a provided malware sample in an isolated sandbox environment and produce an eradication plan.
  1. Submit a provided malware sample (pre-approved, safe for training) to an isolated Cuckoo Sandbox or Any.Run session; record file hashes, strings, and observed behaviors in an analysis worksheet.
  2. Use Sysinternals tools (Process Monitor, Autoruns, TCPView) on a Windows lab VM to identify persistence mechanisms and lateral movement artifacts left by a simulated malware infection.
  3. Write a step-by-step eradication plan for the simulated infection, including removal of malicious registry keys, scheduled tasks, and dropped files, and specify the order of operations to avoid re-infection.
Cuckoo Sandbox or Any.Run (free tier), Sysinternals Suite, pre-staged lab VMs with simulated infection artifacts, malware analysis worksheet, student guidesAnalysis worksheet and eradication plan reviewed by instructor; must correctly identify at least 4 of 5 planted artifacts and provide a logically ordered eradication sequence to pass.
8Recovery Procedures and System Restoration12practiceStudents will restore an affected system to a known-good state following an eradication, verify integrity, and document the recovery process.
  1. Restore a compromised lab VM from a clean snapshot or backup, apply outstanding patches, and reset all service account passwords per the scenario's credential-compromise playbook.
  2. Run a post-recovery vulnerability scan using OpenVAS or Nmap scripts to confirm that the attack vector has been closed, and compare scan output to a pre-incident baseline.
  3. Complete a recovery checklist covering system validation, user notification, and service restoration sign-off; discuss with a partner why rushing recovery without validation creates re-infection risk.
Lab VMs with snapshots, OpenVAS or Nmap, patch management lab guide, recovery checklist template, student notebooksInstructor reviews completed recovery checklist and scan output; all checklist items must be marked complete and scan must show no critical open vulnerabilities on the restored system to pass.
9Legal, Regulatory, and Notification Requirements10theoryStudents will identify the legal and regulatory notification obligations that apply when a breach involves personal, financial, or health-related data in at least two US regulatory contexts.
  1. Read brief summaries of major US breach notification frameworks (HIPAA breach rule, FTC Act requirements, state breach notification laws as a general category) and create a comparison table of trigger conditions and general notification timelines.
  2. Case study analysis: given a scenario where a healthcare provider suffers a ransomware attack encrypting patient records, students determine which regulatory bodies must be notified and draft a bullet-point notification action list.
  3. Class discussion on the tension between law enforcement hold requests (not disclosing publicly during investigation) and regulatory notification deadlines; students write a one-paragraph position statement on how an organization should navigate this.
HHS HIPAA breach notification rule summary, FTC guidance documents, sample state breach notification law summaries (generic), case study handout, student notebooksShort-answer assessment of 5 scenario questions about notification triggers and general timelines; passing score 80% (4 of 5 correct).
10Incident Documentation and Post-Incident Reporting14practiceStudents will produce a complete incident report—including executive summary, technical timeline, root cause analysis, and corrective actions—for a simulated incident scenario.
  1. Using a provided incident scenario packet, build a complete chronological timeline of attacker actions from initial access through detection, documenting each event with timestamp, data source, and confidence level.
  2. Draft an executive summary of no more than one page that explains business impact, scope of data affected, and recommended corrective actions in plain, non-technical language.
  3. Conduct a structured lessons-learned meeting simulation: one student presents the incident as the IR lead while peers playing the roles of IT manager, legal counsel, and executive ask questions; rotate roles.
Incident scenario packet, incident report template, timeline worksheet, presentation slides, student notebooksIncident report evaluated against a 15-point rubric covering timeline accuracy, executive summary clarity, root cause analysis depth, and corrective actions; passing score 11/15.
11Threat Intelligence Integration and IOC Sharing14labStudents will ingest structured threat intelligence feeds into a SIEM or threat intelligence platform and use IOCs to enrich an active incident investigation.
  1. Import a STIX/TAXII feed (using a free MISP community instance or simulated feed) into the lab SIEM, then write correlation rules that alert when a logged IP or domain matches an IOC from the feed.
  2. Using the MITRE ATT&CK Navigator, map the tactics and techniques observed during a previous lab scenario to ATT&CK IDs, then identify two defensive mitigations for each identified technique.
  3. Share a set of IOCs in a standardized format (CSV or STIX JSON) as a group exercise simulating information sharing with an ISAC; discuss the value and risks of sharing specific IOC types (IP vs. domain vs. behavioral).
MISP (open-source), MITRE ATT&CK Navigator (browser-based, free), sample STIX/TAXII feed files, lab SIEM instance, ATT&CK worksheetInstructor verifies ATT&CK mapping worksheet covers at least 5 correctly identified techniques with corresponding mitigations; SIEM correlation rule must fire on a test IOC match to pass.
12Full Incident Response Simulation Capstone Lab20labStudents will execute a complete, timed incident response from detection through post-incident report for a multi-stage simulated breach, demonstrating competency across all lifecycle phases.
  1. Respond to an instructor-injected simulated incident in the lab environment: receive an alert, triage logs in the SIEM, identify affected systems, and declare the incident within the first 30 minutes.
  2. Perform containment (network isolation), collect forensic evidence (memory dump, disk image with hashes), eradicate malware artifacts, and restore from backup—all within a 90-minute lab window while maintaining a running case log.
  3. Complete and present a full incident report (timeline, executive summary, root cause analysis, lessons learned, and IOC list) to the instructor acting as the CISO; respond to at least three probing questions about decisions made during the response.
Full lab environment (SIEM, VMs, forensic tools, sandbox), incident scenario packet, case log template, incident report template, timing clockHolistic rubric scored by instructor across five domains: detection accuracy, evidence integrity, containment without evidence loss, eradication completeness, and report quality; minimum 75% overall with no domain scored below 60%.
Assessments
AssessmentTypeWeightPass standardMethod & rubric
Incident Response Lifecycle Knowledge ExamWritten exam25%75% or higher (38 of 50 questions correct)A 50-question multiple-choice exam covering NIST SP 800-61 lifecycle phases, incident classification, forensic principles, legal notification requirements, and threat intelligence concepts. Questions are aligned to CompTIA Security+ Domain 4 (Security Operations) and CompTIA CySA+ incident response and vulnerability management objectives.
Standard met · Safety · Time · Quality/finish · Documentation
Forensic Evidence Collection and Incident Containment Skills DemonstrationSkills demonstration45%All critical steps on a 20-point performance checklist completed correctly; no critical step may be failedThe student is given a live lab VM with an active simulated infection and must capture memory, create a verified disk image, isolate the system from the network, and begin an eradication sequence—all while maintaining chain of custody. The instructor observes and scores each step in real time using a standardized checklist.
Standard met · Safety · Time · Quality/finish · Documentation
Incident Response Lab Log PortfolioLog15%At least 10 of 12 lessons have a complete, accurate lab log entry; overall portfolio score of 80% on the scoring rubricStudents maintain a structured lab log throughout the course recording objectives, tools used, commands executed, results observed, and brief analysis for each hands-on lesson. The portfolio is submitted at course end and evaluated for completeness, technical accuracy, and quality of analysis.
Standard met · Safety · Time · Quality/finish · Documentation
Evidence Handling and Safe Practices Safety CheckSafety audit15%All six critical safety and legal handling items marked satisfactory; any unsatisfactory item requires immediate remediation and recheckThe instructor observes the student performing an evidence intake procedure, verifying that chain-of-custody documentation is completed before handling media, no evidence containers are left unattended, hashes are verified before and after imaging, and all sensitive data is stored in a secured location per the lab policy. This check also confirms students follow proper ergonomic and electrical safety practices when handling lab hardware.
Standard met · Safety · Time · Quality/finish · Documentation
TEC-CYBE44-08 Capstone

Capstone Project: Integrated Cybersecurity Defense and Documentation

216 hr · $2,160 COMPLIMENTARY

Students design, build, and defend a comprehensive cybersecurity solution for a simulated small-to-medium enterprise environment, integrating skills from networking, Linux administration, scripting, SIEM configuration, and incident response. The project culminates in a formal technical documentation package and an oral defense panel review, mirroring real-world security analyst deliverables. All work is mapped to CompTIA Security+, CompTIA CySA+, and ISC2 CC competency domains.

Outcomes
Course text

Students design, build, and defend a comprehensive cybersecurity solution for a simulated small-to-medium enterprise environment, integrating skills from networking, Linux administration, scripting, SIEM configuration, and incident response. The project culminates in a formal technical documentation package and an oral defense panel review, mirroring real-world security analyst deliverables. All work is mapped to CompTIA Security+, CompTIA CySA+, and ISC2 CC competency domains.

How the course runs. 4 blocks: Capstone Scoping, Architecture Design, and Risk Planning; Environment Build, Hardening, and Automation; Vulnerability Assessment, Incident Simulation, and After-Action Documentation; Capstone Defense Preparation and Oral Presentation.

What competent looks like. Design a layered enterprise security architecture that addresses confidentiality, integrity, and availability for a given threat scenario, documenting all design decisions with rationale aligned to recognized security frameworks. Implement and harden a multi-component lab environment including a Linux server, firewall rules, and a SIEM instance, demonstrating configuration accuracy verified by instructor review and automated scan results. Develop and execute a Python or Bash automation script that ingests log data, detects at least two simulated attack patterns, and generates an alert report requiring no manual correction to run. Produce a professional documentation package including a network diagram, security policy, risk register, incident response runbook, and after-action report that meets the formatting and content standards of a junior security analyst role. Conduct and document a structured vulnerability assessment of the capstone environment using an industry-standard scanner, correctly classifying findings by severity and recommending prioritized remediation steps. Present and defend all design and implementation decisions to a panel of evaluators, responding accurately to technical follow-up questions and demonstrating understanding of the credential domains covered throughout the program.

Lessons · 4 blocks
#LessonHrTypeObjectiveActivitiesMaterialsCheck
1Capstone Scoping, Architecture Design, and Risk Planning48theoryStudents produce a complete project scope document and network security architecture plan for a given enterprise scenario, including a risk register with likelihood and impact ratings for at least eight identified threats.
  1. Students receive a written scenario brief describing a fictional 75-person company with specific compliance obligations; they conduct a structured threat-modeling session using the STRIDE methodology to identify and categorize threats, recording findings in a shared risk register template.
  2. Each student drafts a logical network diagram using draw.io or an equivalent free diagramming tool, placing security controls (firewall, IDS, SIEM, DMZ) at appropriate boundaries and annotating each control with the Security+ or CySA+ domain it addresses.
  3. Students write a two-to-three page project scope document that defines in-scope assets, out-of-scope systems, success criteria, a weekly milestone schedule for the remaining capstone lessons, and a brief justification of the security framework (NIST CSF or comparable) that will guide implementation decisions.
Scenario brief handout, STRIDE threat-modeling worksheet, draw.io (free web tool), NIST Cybersecurity Framework summary document, CompTIA Security+ exam objectives (current version), risk register spreadsheet template, word processorInstructor reviews the scope document and risk register using a rubric; passing standard requires the risk register to contain at least eight threats each rated for likelihood and impact, the network diagram to include at least four distinct security control layers with correct placement, and the scope document to identify measurable success criteria. Score of 80% or higher on the rubric is required to proceed.
2Environment Build, Hardening, and Automation72labStudents build and harden the virtualized enterprise environment defined in their architecture plan, configure a SIEM to ingest logs from at least three sources, and deliver a working automation script that detects at least two attack signatures in sample log data.
  1. Using VirtualBox or an equivalent free hypervisor, students deploy at minimum a Linux server (Ubuntu Server LTS or CentOS Stream), a Windows 10 or 11 endpoint, and a pfSense or comparable open-source firewall VM; they apply CIS Benchmark hardening steps appropriate to each system, documenting each change in a hardening log that records the setting, its default value, the applied value, and the CIS Benchmark control reference.
  2. Students configure their SIEM instance (Splunk Free, Elastic Stack, or Wazuh) to receive syslog and Windows Event Log data from the Linux server, the Windows endpoint, and the firewall; they create at least four correlation rules or saved searches targeting common attack patterns (failed authentication brute force, port scanning, privilege escalation, and outbound connection to a known bad IP from the provided blocklist) and verify each rule fires correctly against instructor-supplied sample log files.
  3. Students write a Python 3 or Bash script, at least 40 lines of functional code, that parses a provided raw log file, identifies occurrences of two or more defined attack signatures by regular expression or keyword matching, counts events per source IP, and writes a formatted plain-text alert report to a specified output file; the script must execute without errors from the command line on the lab machine.
Lab workstations with virtualization capability, VirtualBox (free), Ubuntu Server LTS ISO, pfSense or OPNsense ISO, Windows evaluation ISO, Splunk Free or Wazuh OVA, Python 3 interpreter, VS Code or nano, CIS Benchmarks for Linux and Windows (free PDF download from CIS), sample log file set provided by instructor, hardening log templateInstructor runs a checklist-based live verification: firewall must block a test scan from an attacker VM, at least four SIEM rules must fire correctly against the sample log set, and the automation script must produce the correct alert report with zero runtime errors. All three checks must pass, and the hardening log must document at least ten applied controls with control references, to earn a passing mark of 80% on the lab rubric.
3Vulnerability Assessment, Incident Simulation, and After-Action Documentation54practiceStudents conduct a structured vulnerability scan of their capstone environment, respond to two instructor-injected simulated incidents using their runbook, and produce a complete documentation package including findings report, incident tickets, and an after-action report.
  1. Students run OpenVAS (Greenbone Community Edition) or Nessus Essentials against their capstone environment, export the scan results, and produce a written vulnerability findings report that classifies each finding as Critical, High, Medium, or Low using CVSS severity bands, explains the risk in plain language, and recommends a specific remediation action for every Critical and High finding; the report must follow the formatting guide provided by the instructor.
  2. The instructor injects two simulated incidents into the running environment during a defined two-hour window (a brute-force SSH login attempt resulting in one successful login, and a malware beacon to a flagged external IP); students must detect each incident using their SIEM, document their detection and containment steps in an incident ticket following the format from the Incident Response course, and achieve containment within the time parameters defined in their runbook.
  3. Students compile the complete documentation package: finalized network diagram, security policy (acceptable use, password, and patch management sections), risk register updated with residual risk ratings post-hardening, incident response runbook, the two completed incident tickets, and a two-page after-action report that identifies what worked, what failed, and three concrete process improvements; all documents are collected in a single organized PDF portfolio.
OpenVAS Greenbone Community Edition or Nessus Essentials (free tier), CVSS scoring guide (FIRST.org), incident ticket template from Course 7, vulnerability findings report template, after-action report template, security policy template, PDF export tool, instructor-prepared incident injection scriptsInstructor scores the vulnerability findings report on a rubric requiring correct severity classification of at least 90% of flagged findings and a remediation recommendation for every Critical and High item. Both simulated incidents must be documented in completed tickets with correct timeline, containment actions, and evidence references. The full documentation package must include all seven required documents. A composite score of 80% or higher across the rubric sections is required to sit the oral defense.
4Capstone Defense Preparation and Oral Presentation42demoStudents prepare and deliver a structured 30-minute technical defense of their capstone project to a panel of evaluators, demonstrating the live environment and accurately answering follow-up questions on design decisions, implementation details, and credential domain concepts.
  1. Students create a presentation slide deck of 12 to 18 slides covering: project scenario and scope, architecture decisions with threat-model justification, hardening steps and evidence, SIEM rule logic and alert demonstration, automation script walkthrough, vulnerability findings summary and remediation priorities, and lessons learned; they rehearse the presentation twice in class, once alone timed and once in front of a peer who uses the defense rubric to give structured feedback.
  2. Students conduct a peer review exchange in pairs, each acting as a panel evaluator for the other; the reviewer uses the instructor-provided question bank drawn from Security+, CySA+, and ISC2 CC domain topics to ask at least five technical questions, scores the responses using the rubric, and provides written feedback; both students then revise weak areas before the formal defense.
  3. Each student delivers the formal 30-minute defense to a panel of at least two evaluators (instructor plus one additional evaluator such as a program advisor, employer partner, or a second instructor); the student must live-demonstrate at least one SIEM alert firing and the automation script executing, and must respond to a minimum of five panel questions drawn from the question bank without consulting notes.
Presentation software (LibreOffice Impress or Google Slides), defense rubric, question bank document organized by Security+/CySA+/ISC2 CC domain, live capstone lab environment, projector or large monitor, timer, peer feedback formPanel scores the defense using the rubric across five categories: presentation clarity and organization, technical accuracy of design decisions, live demonstration success, quality of documentation package (previously graded, confirmed complete), and correctness of responses to panel questions. Each category is scored 1 to 4; a total score of at least 80% is required to pass the defense. A student who scores below 80% may request one remediation opportunity within five business days.
Assessments
AssessmentTypeWeightPass standardMethod & rubric
Capstone Project: Enterprise Security Build and Documentation PackageProject60%Composite rubric score of 80% or higher across all graded components: architecture plan, hardening log, SIEM configuration verification, automation script, vulnerability findings report, incident tickets, and after-action reportThe project assessment evaluates the complete technical deliverable set produced across Lessons 1 through 3, treating the student's virtualized enterprise environment and its accompanying documentation as a unified work product. Evaluators use a criterion-referenced rubric that weights implementation accuracy, documentation completeness, and professional formatting, with any Critical or High vulnerability left unremediated and undocumented counting as an automatic deduction.
Meets specification · Within estimate · Workmanship · Safety · Documentation
Professional Portfolio: Integrated Security Documentation SetPortfolio20%All seven required documents present, correctly formatted, and internally consistent; no document may score below 70% on its individual rubric section, and the overall portfolio must average 80% or higherThe portfolio is the single organized PDF package assembled in Lesson 3, containing the network diagram, security policy, risk register, incident response runbook, two completed incident tickets, and the after-action report. It is evaluated for professional quality, logical consistency across documents, and alignment with the NIST Cybersecurity Framework categories referenced in the scope document, demonstrating that the student can produce work-ready analyst documentation.
Completeness · Organization · Evidence quality
Oral Defense Panel ReviewOral / panel20%Total panel rubric score of 80% or higher across the five scoring categories; a single live demonstration failure (SIEM or script does not execute) reduces the demonstration category score to zero and requires a remediation attemptThe oral defense is evaluated by a panel of at least two evaluators using the structured rubric during the student's 30-minute formal presentation in Lesson 4. The panel scores presentation quality, technical accuracy of design justifications, success of the live demonstration, portfolio confirmation, and correctness of responses to domain-mapped questions from the Security+, CySA+, and ISC2 CC question bank, ensuring the student can explain and defend professional-level work under realistic conditions.
Explains decisions · Answers technical questions · Professional communication
TEC-CYBE44-09 Externship / clinical

Externship / Worksite Placement in Cybersecurity

324 hr · $1,295 COMPLIMENTARY

Students complete 324 supervised hours at an approved employer site in a cybersecurity-related role, applying classroom knowledge to live or near-live environments under the direct guidance of a credentialed industry mentor. Work may include security operations center (SOC) support, IT security administration, vulnerability management, or incident response assistance. A structured employer evaluation and a reflective log document professional growth and technical competency across all externship phases.

Outcomes
Course text

Students complete 324 supervised hours at an approved employer site in a cybersecurity-related role, applying classroom knowledge to live or near-live environments under the direct guidance of a credentialed industry mentor. Work may include security operations center (SOC) support, IT security administration, vulnerability management, or incident response assistance. A structured employer evaluation and a reflective log document professional growth and technical competency across all externship phases.

How the course runs. 4 blocks: Externship Orientation and Site Integration; Operational Security Support Tasks; Applied Security Project or Assigned Initiative; Externship Completion, Employer Evaluation, and Professional Debrief.

What competent looks like. Perform assigned cybersecurity tasks—such as log monitoring, alert triage, user account administration, or vulnerability scanning—under employer supervision, meeting the quality standards set by the host site. Demonstrate professional conduct, punctuality, and communication skills consistent with cybersecurity workplace norms across all 324 externship hours. Apply security policies, access-control principles, and data-handling procedures that align with the host organization's security program. Identify and report potential security incidents or anomalies through the proper escalation channels established by the host employer. Maintain a detailed reflective work log that documents tasks completed, tools used, and lessons learned during each externship phase. Receive a satisfactory or above rating on the employer's end-of-externship evaluation rubric covering technical skills, professionalism, and readiness for entry-level employment.

Lessons · 4 blocks
#LessonHrTypeObjectiveActivitiesMaterialsCheck
1Externship Orientation and Site Integration40fieldThe student will successfully complete all onboarding requirements at the host employer site, demonstrate understanding of site-specific policies and escalation procedures, and begin contributing to assigned tasks within the first 40 hours.
  1. Complete employer onboarding: sign acceptable-use and confidentiality agreements, receive access credentials, and tour the physical and logical security controls of the worksite (badge access, locked server areas, clean-desk policy).
  2. Shadow a mentor or senior analyst for a minimum of 20 hours, observing daily workflows such as shift handoff briefings, ticket queue management, alert review, or patch status reporting, and record observations in the work log.
  3. Meet with the school externship coordinator and the site supervisor to confirm the individualized learning plan (ILP), clarify measurable goals for each externship phase, and submit the completed ILP form by the end of hour 40.
Employer onboarding packet; site security policy documents; OSHA general-industry safety guidance for office/data-center environments; work log template (provided by program); individualized learning plan (ILP) form; personal protective equipment if required by site (safety glasses, ESD wrist strap for hardware areas).Completed and signed ILP submitted to the school coordinator; mentor observation checklist signed by site supervisor confirming student attended all required onboarding sessions; first 40 hours of work log entries reviewed—pass requires legible, accurate daily entries covering tasks observed, tools encountered, and questions raised.
2Operational Security Support Tasks120labThe student will execute assigned security support tasks—such as monitoring SIEM dashboards, triaging helpdesk security tickets, running credentialed vulnerability scans, reviewing firewall or access logs, or assisting with user provisioning and de-provisioning—accurately and on schedule as directed by the site supervisor.
  1. Perform daily or shift-based log and alert monitoring using the employer's SIEM, EDR, or ticketing platform; document each alert disposition (resolved, escalated, false positive) in the work log with a brief rationale, targeting at least three independently handled tickets or alerts per shift.
  2. Assist with at least one recurring operational process—such as weekly vulnerability scan execution and report generation, user access review, or patch compliance reporting—from initiation through delivery of results to the responsible team, documenting steps and any anomalies discovered.
  3. Participate in at least one team meeting, stand-up, or after-action review; prepare a one-page written summary of the agenda, decisions made, and any action items assigned to the student, submitted to the school coordinator at the midpoint of this phase.
Employer-provisioned workstation and credentials; SIEM platform (site-specific, e.g., Splunk, Microsoft Sentinel, or equivalent); vulnerability scanner (e.g., Nessus, Tenable.io, or equivalent) if used at site; ticketing system (e.g., ServiceNow, Jira, or equivalent); work log; one-page meeting summary template.Site supervisor mid-externship evaluation form completed and returned to school coordinator by hour 160—pass requires a rating of 'Satisfactory' or above in task accuracy, dependability, and communication; work log entries for all 120 hours reviewed for completeness; one-page meeting summary on file.
3Applied Security Project or Assigned Initiative120practiceThe student will complete a defined security project or initiative assigned by the host employer—such as drafting or updating a security procedure, conducting a phishing simulation review, building a dashboard, or supporting an internal audit—and deliver a documented output that meets the employer's acceptance criteria.
  1. Collaborate with the site supervisor to define the project scope, deliverables, timeline, and success criteria in writing during the first week of this phase; submit the project brief to the school coordinator for review before work begins.
  2. Execute the project tasks over the allocated weeks, maintaining a project journal (separate from the general work log) that records decisions made, obstacles encountered, resources consulted, and revisions to approach—entries made at least every two working days.
  3. Present completed deliverables to the site supervisor or a small employer audience in a professional briefing of 10–20 minutes; prepare a one-to-two-page written summary of the project outcomes, what worked, what would be improved, and how the work relates to Security+, CySA+, or ISC2 CC knowledge domains.
Employer-provisioned tools appropriate to the project (documentation software, SIEM, scanning tools, spreadsheet/reporting tools); project brief template; project journal; CompTIA Security+ and CySA+ exam objectives documents (current versions from CompTIA website) used as reference for domain alignment; ISC2 CC candidate handbook for domain reference.Employer acceptance of project deliverable confirmed in writing (email or signed form); project journal reviewed by school coordinator—pass requires entries covering at least 80% of working days in this phase; written project summary submitted and reviewed—pass requires clear description of deliverable, honest self-assessment, and accurate mapping to at least two credential exam domain areas.
4Externship Completion, Employer Evaluation, and Professional Debrief44fieldThe student will finalize all assigned tasks, obtain a completed employer evaluation, return all site-issued equipment and credentials following proper offboarding procedures, and participate in a school-led professional debrief that connects externship experience to career readiness and upcoming certification exam preparation.
  1. Complete all outstanding assigned tasks and hand off any ongoing work to the site team using a documented transition note; ensure all employer-issued accounts are deactivated or transferred per the employer's offboarding checklist, and confirm with the supervisor that no data, credentials, or proprietary information is retained on personal devices.
  2. Request and receive the completed employer final evaluation rubric—covering technical skill, professionalism, reliability, communication, and readiness for employment—signed by the site supervisor and submitted to the school coordinator before the final day on site.
  3. Attend a structured debrief session with the school externship coordinator: present a 10-minute oral reflection on the externship experience, discuss how observed real-world practices connect to Security+, CySA+, and ISC2 CC exam domains, and identify two to three specific knowledge or skill gaps to address during the upcoming certification exam preparation course.
Employer offboarding checklist; employer final evaluation rubric (school-provided form completed by site supervisor); complete compiled work log (all phases); debrief reflection guide; CompTIA Security+, CySA+, and ISC2 CC exam objectives documents for domain gap mapping.Employer final evaluation rubric received with an overall rating of 'Satisfactory' or above—this is the primary pass condition; offboarding checklist signed by site supervisor confirming clean departure; complete work log (all 324 hours) submitted and approved by coordinator; oral debrief completed with documented gap list accepted by coordinator.
Assessments
AssessmentTypeWeightPass standardMethod & rubric
Employer Worksite Skills Demonstration EvaluationSkills demonstration70%An overall rating of 'Satisfactory' or above on all major rubric categories (technical task performance, professionalism and conduct, communication, and reliability) as scored by the host site supervisor on the school's standardized employer evaluation form; a single 'Unsatisfactory' rating in any category requires a documented remediation plan and coordinator review before credit is awarded.The host employer's designated supervisor completes the school's standardized final evaluation rubric at the conclusion of the externship, rating the student across technical skills, professionalism, communication, and employment readiness. This evaluation reflects the full 324-hour placement period and is the primary competency determination for externship credit.
Competency · Safety · Attendance · Conduct · Initiative
Externship Work Log and Project Documentation PortfolioLog30%All 324 hours of work log entries present, legible, and covering required elements (date, hours, tasks, tools, reflections); project journal covering at least 80% of project-phase working days; project brief, written project summary, and written meeting summary all submitted; oral debrief completed with an accepted gap analysis—any missing component must be remediated and resubmitted within 10 business days of the final externship day.The student submits the complete work log spanning all four externship phases, together with the project journal, project brief, project written summary, meeting summary, and the debrief gap-analysis document, assembled as a portfolio reviewed by the school externship coordinator. The portfolio provides a verifiable record of hours, tasks, professional growth, and the student's ability to connect workplace experience to credential exam knowledge domains.
Complete · Verified
TEC-CYBE44-10 Exam prep

Certification Exam Preparation: Security+, CySA+, and ISC2 CC

90 hr · $900 COMPLIMENTARY

This course systematically reviews every exam domain covered by the CompTIA Security+, CompTIA CySA+, and ISC2 CC credentials, closing knowledge gaps identified through diagnostic testing and spaced-repetition practice. Learners work through mapped domain content, timed question sets, and full-length simulated exams that mirror the format, item types, and difficulty of each actual certification exam. The course ends with a comprehensive mock-exam session and a personalized final study plan so every student enters the testing center prepared and confident.

Outcomes
Course text

This course systematically reviews every exam domain covered by the CompTIA Security+, CompTIA CySA+, and ISC2 CC credentials, closing knowledge gaps identified through diagnostic testing and spaced-repetition practice. Learners work through mapped domain content, timed question sets, and full-length simulated exams that mirror the format, item types, and difficulty of each actual certification exam. The course ends with a comprehensive mock-exam session and a personalized final study plan so every student enters the testing center prepared and confident.

How the course runs. 4 blocks: Diagnostic Assessment and Domain Mapping; Domain-by-Domain Content Review: Security+, CySA+, and ISC2 CC; Performance-Based Questions, Test Strategy, and Exam Logistics; Full Mock Exam Day: Security+, CySA+, and ISC2 CC Simulation.

What competent looks like. Correctly answer practice questions drawn from all domains of the CompTIA Security+ exam at or above the minimum passing standard on at least two consecutive timed practice sets. Correctly answer practice questions drawn from all domains of the CompTIA CySA+ exam at or above the minimum passing standard on at least two consecutive timed practice sets. Correctly answer practice questions drawn from all domains of the ISC2 CC exam at or above the minimum passing standard on at least two consecutive timed practice sets. Demonstrate test-taking strategies—including elimination technique, performance-based question (PBQ) approach, and time management—by completing a full-length timed mock exam within the allotted window for each credential. Produce a personalized gap-analysis study plan that maps weak domains to targeted resources for continued self-study after the course ends. Complete a cumulative full mock-exam day simulating real testing-center conditions for all three credentials and score at or above the passing threshold on each.

Lessons · 4 blocks
#LessonHrTypeObjectiveActivitiesMaterialsCheck
1Diagnostic Assessment and Domain Mapping12practiceLearners complete a timed diagnostic practice exam for each of the three credentials and use scored results to produce a personal domain gap-analysis chart that prioritizes their remaining study time.
  1. Complete three separate timed diagnostic practice exams (one per credential) using a reputable question bank such as the official CompTIA CertMaster Practice or comparable platform, recording scores by domain.
  2. Transfer domain scores to a color-coded gap-analysis spreadsheet, flagging any domain below 70% as a priority focus area and ranking all domains from weakest to strongest.
  3. Pair with a classmate to compare gap charts, discuss common weak areas, and jointly draft a two-week study schedule that allocates more time to red-flagged domains before the mock exam sessions.
Laptop with internet access; CompTIA CertMaster Practice or equivalent reputable question-bank subscription; ISC2 CC practice question sets (ISC2 official study materials); blank gap-analysis spreadsheet template; timer or online exam simulator with built-in timer.Instructor reviews each learner's completed gap-analysis chart and study schedule for accuracy and realistic time allocation; pass standard is a submitted, domain-complete chart with at least one priority action listed per flagged domain.
2Domain-by-Domain Content Review: Security+, CySA+, and ISC2 CC42theoryLearners review all exam domains across the three credentials—covering topics such as threats and vulnerabilities, security architecture, identity management, incident response, security operations, compliance, and risk management—and correctly answer targeted practice questions at the close of each domain block.
  1. Work through instructor-led domain review sessions (approximately 14 hours per credential) using official CompTIA study guides, the ISC2 CC candidate information document, and supplementary video resources such as Professor Messer's free Security+ course notes; take structured notes using the Cornell method and annotate with real-world examples from prior coursework.
  2. After each domain block, complete a 20-question timed domain quiz in the question bank, review every incorrect answer using the platform's explanation feature, and record the concept in a personal error log with a one-sentence explanation of why the correct answer is correct.
  3. Participate in instructor-facilitated Socratic review sessions where the instructor presents scenario-based stems (e.g., 'A SOC analyst sees repeated failed login attempts from a single IP — which control is BEST?') and learners must select, justify, and debate answers before the correct response is revealed.
CompTIA Security+ Study Guide (current exam version, Sybex or Mike Chapple/David Seidl edition); CompTIA CySA+ Study Guide (current exam version); ISC2 CC official candidate resources; Professor Messer free study notes and practice exams (professormesser.com); Jason Dion Udemy practice exams or equivalent; whiteboard; printed domain-objective checklists from CompTIA and ISC2 websites.Each domain quiz must score 75% or higher; learners who score below 75% on any domain quiz receive a targeted remediation reading assignment and must retest on a fresh 20-question set before the course advances; instructor spot-checks error logs for completeness.
3Performance-Based Questions, Test Strategy, and Exam Logistics18demoLearners apply structured test-taking strategies—including answer elimination, performance-based question (PBQ) lab simulation navigation, and pacing—to correctly complete mixed-format practice sets under timed, exam-like conditions.
  1. Instructor demonstrates live on-screen the step-by-step approach to CompTIA performance-based questions (drag-and-drop, matching, simulation-type items) using the official CompTIA demo exam interface; learners follow along on individual laptops, pausing to attempt each item before the instructor reveals the approach.
  2. Learners work independently through a 30-item mixed-format timed set (including at least five PBQ-type items) under strict exam conditions—no notes, no lookups, no communication—then debrief as a class using a projected answer key, recording pacing data (time per question) to identify any items where more than three minutes was spent.
  3. Discuss and practice the 'Flag and Move' strategy: learners deliberately flag difficult items, complete all others, then return; instructor coaches on recognizing distractor language (e.g., 'BEST,' 'MOST,' 'LEAST'), and the group reviews at least ten real-world distractor examples from past practice sets; learners also review exam registration procedures, ID requirements, NDA acknowledgment at check-in, and retake policies for each credential.
CompTIA official demo exam interface (comptia.org); Pearson VUE candidate handbook; ISC2 exam policies page; printed pacing worksheet; exam-day checklist handout (acceptable ID, arrival time, prohibited items, what to expect at check-in); whiteboard for strategy diagrams.Learners must complete the 30-item timed practice set with a score of 75% or higher and demonstrate appropriate pacing (no more than 25% of items flagged); instructor reviews pacing sheets and discusses any student who flagged more than eight items for time-management coaching.
4Full Mock Exam Day: Security+, CySA+, and ISC2 CC Simulation18practiceLearners sit three separate full-length timed mock exams—one per credential—under testing-center conditions and produce a final gap-analysis update and personalized post-course study plan based on scores.
  1. Sit a full-length Security+ mock exam (number of items and time limit matching the current published exam format) using an exam-simulator platform in strict testing-center conditions: no notes, no phones, no communication; immediately after, record domain subscores on the gap-analysis spreadsheet.
  2. Sit a full-length CySA+ mock exam and then a full-length ISC2 CC mock exam under identical conditions, with a 15-minute break between each exam; record all domain subscores.
  3. Review all three scored reports with the instructor in a one-on-one debrief conference; update the personal gap-analysis chart with final scores, identify any domain still below 75%, and write a concrete post-course study plan listing specific chapters, videos, or practice sets to complete before each real exam date.
Exam-simulator platform with full-length tests for all three credentials (e.g., CompTIA CertMaster Practice, Jason Dion practice exams on Udemy, ISC2 official practice questions); blank answer sheets as backup; gap-analysis spreadsheet (updated version from Lesson 1); timer; post-course study plan template.Pass standard for the mock exam day is a score at or above the published passing threshold (or equivalent percentage benchmark set by the instructor where exact scaled scores are unavailable) on all three full mock exams, or a completed, instructor-approved remediation plan for any exam below threshold; the post-course study plan must be submitted and approved before the learner is cleared as exam-ready.
Assessments
AssessmentTypeWeightPass standardMethod & rubric
Cumulative Mock Certification Exam — Security+, CySA+, and ISC2 CCMock certification exam100%Score at or above the instructor-set passing benchmark (aligned to each credential's published passing standard) on all three full-length mock exams, and submit a complete, instructor-approved post-course study plan; learners who fall below threshold on one or two exams may retest on a parallel question set within one week and must score at or above benchmark on the retake to be cleared as exam-ready.Learners complete three full-length, timed, closed-book mock exams—one each for CompTIA Security+, CompTIA CySA+, and ISC2 CC—administered consecutively under conditions that replicate an actual Pearson VUE or testing-center environment. Scores are reviewed by domain in a one-on-one debrief, and each learner must demonstrate overall readiness through both their exam performance and a written post-course study plan that addresses any remaining weak domains before their scheduled real exam dates.
Score · Time management
Program completion

External credential: CompTIA CySA+; CompTIA Security+; ISC2 CC

Students prepare for and sit the CompTIA Security+, CompTIA CySA+, and ISC2 CC certification exams, administered by Computing Technology Industry Association (CompTIA) and ISC2 respectively at authorized testing centers. Pass standard: Credential issued by the body.

Back to Cybersecurity · How the school gets authority to award these credentials