Home / cybersecurity / EC-Council Computer Hacking Forensic Investigator (CHFI v11, Exam 312-49) / Cheat Sheet
EC-Council Computer Hacking Forensic Investigator (CHFI v11, Exam 312-49)

CHFI Cheat Sheet

CHFI Tests Evidence You Can Defend in Court — Not Just Tools You Can Name

CHFI v11 is a 150-question, four-hour exam for investigators. Think like an examiner who preserves, verifies and documents, not an incident responder racing to restore service.

Check Your Readiness →
Among the harder certs
Avg: Not published by EC-Council
Pass: 750 / 1000
Most candidates understand EC-Council Computer Hacking Forensic Investigator (CHFI v11, Exam 312-49) concepts — and still fail. This exam tests how you apply knowledge under pressure.

CHFI v11 (312-49) Blueprint v3 Domain Map

Weights are nearly flat, so no domain can be skipped. Expect short recall items (event IDs, hex headers, hive names) mixed with next-step questions placed mid-investigation. Distractors are usually real tools or laws from the wrong category, so classification decides many answers.

  1. 01
    Forensic Science (18%) — cybercrime types, order of volatility, acquisition formats, cloud, email and fileless basics
  2. 02
    Regulations, Policies and Ethics (15%) — warrants, consent, chain of custody, admissibility, CFAA, ECPA, GDPR
  3. 03
    Digital Evidence (17%) — NTFS, ext4, MBR/GPT, file signatures, event IDs, IIS and MySQL logs
  4. 04
    Procedures and Methodology (17%) — investigation phases, write blockers, hash validation, registry hives, timelines
  5. 05
    Digital Forensics (17%) — anti-forensics, web attacks in logs, email headers, cloud logs, malware analysis
  6. 06
    Tools/Systems/Programs (16%) — picking the right acquisition, memory, mobile, database and cloud tool

Wrong instinct vs correct approach

During a warrant search for embezzlement records, the examiner spots images suggesting an unrelated crime
✕ Wrong instinct

Keep searching the drive for anything else related to the new crime

✓ Correct approach

Stop and seek additional authority. A warrant is limited to the items it particularly describes; plain view lets you seize what is openly visible but never authorizes a fresh search for a new evidence category.

Dozens of event ID 4625 entries for one account within two minutes, followed by a single 4624
✕ Wrong instinct

Normal user who mistyped the password a few times

✓ Correct approach

4625 is a failed logon and 4624 a success, so a burst of failures ending in success indicates a brute-force or password-guessing attack that worked. Correlate the source address and follow the session that started.

An IIS log shows a URL-encoded UNION SELECT request returning 200 with an unusually large response size
✕ Wrong instinct

A 200 status alone proves the data was stolen

✓ Correct approach

Decode the payload first: %27 is a quote, so this is SQL injection. The oversized response, not the 200 code, suggests successful extraction. Confirm with database logs before stating impact.

A case hinges on recovering deleted files from a suspect laptop with an SSD
✕ Wrong instinct

Take a logical copy and carve deleted files as on an HDD

✓ Correct approach

Only a physical bit-stream image captures unallocated and slack space, and even then TRIM and wear levelling may already have erased deleted blocks. Image physically, verify hashes, and report the SSD recovery limitation.

Know these cold

  • ▸ Volatility order — egisters/cache, routing and ARP, RAM, temp files, disk, remote logs, archives
  • ▸ Event IDs — 624 logon success, 4625 failure, 4720 account created, 1102 Security log cleared, 4104 PowerShell block
  • ▸ Signatures — PEG FF D8 FF, PDF %PDF, ZIP PK (50 4B), Windows executable MZ (4D 5A)
  • ▸ Raw dd has no metadata; E01 adds compression, case data and hashes; AFF is the open alternative
  • ▸ Hash both source and image; a write blocker never protects a running system's live state
  • ▸ USB history lives in the SYSTEM hive; per-user activity lives in NTUSER.DAT, not SAM
  • ▸ Timestomping check — ompare MFT $STANDARD_INFORMATION against $FILE_NAME timestamps
  • ▸ LNK and shellbags show access; prefetch and event logs prove a program actually executed
  • ▸ ADB needs USB debugging and is Android only; iPhones need libimobiledevice or Cellebrite UFED
  • ▸ MySQL changes — ysqlbinlog; SQL Server changes: fn_dblog or ApexSQL Log

Can you answer these without checking your notes?

In this scenario: "During a warrant search for embezzlement records, the examiner spots images suggesting an unrelated crime" — what should you do first?
Stop and seek additional authority. A warrant is limited to the items it particularly describes; plain view lets you seize what is openly visible but never authorizes a fresh search for a new evidence category.
In this scenario: "Dozens of event ID 4625 entries for one account within two minutes, followed by a single 4624" — what should you do first?
4625 is a failed logon and 4624 a success, so a burst of failures ending in success indicates a brute-force or password-guessing attack that worked. Correlate the source address and follow the session that started.
In this scenario: "An IIS log shows a URL-encoded UNION SELECT request returning 200 with an unusually large response size" — what should you do first?
Decode the payload first: %27 is a quote, so this is SQL injection. The oversized response, not the 200 code, suggests successful extraction. Confirm with database logs before stating impact.

Common Exam Mistakes — What candidates get wrong

Imaging the disk before capturing RAM from a running machine

RFC 3227 order of volatility puts registers, cache, ARP tables and memory ahead of disk. Powering off a logged-in system loses processes, connections and access to a mounted BitLocker volume, so live memory capture comes first.

Choosing Volatility to acquire memory instead of analyse it

Volatility only parses a memory image. Acquisition needs FTK Imager or Belkasoft RAM Capturer on Windows, or the LiME kernel module on Linux and Android. The exam pairs capture tasks with analysis tools as distractors.

Reading email Received headers from top to bottom to find the origin

Every relay prepends its own Received line, so the originating hop sits at the bottom. The From field is trivially forged; corroborate the path with SPF, DKIM and DMARC results before naming a source.

Treating a matching hash as a substitute for chain of custody

A SHA-256 match proves the image content is unchanged; it says nothing about who held the evidence. Courts expect every transfer logged with date, time, person and purpose from seizure to testimony.

Looking in CloudTrail for network traffic from an EC2 instance

CloudTrail records management API calls such as DeleteBucket or TerminateInstances and who made them. Ports, IPs and bytes live in VPC Flow Logs. GuardDuty produces threat findings, not the authoritative audit trail.

Resources to help you pass EC-Council CHFI on your first attempt

CHFI punishes mixing up capture tools, analysis tools and legal authority. Find your gaps.