The last login message displays the last login date and time, allowing a user
to discover if their account was used by someone else. Hence, this is rather a detective
control.
Source: RUSSEL, Deborah & GANGEMI, G.T. Sr., Computer Security Basics, O'Reilly,
July 1992 (page 63).

Section: Security Operation Adimnistration
Explanation/Reference:
Confidentiality is defined as the property that ensures that only the intended recipient can access the data and nobody else. It is usually achieve using cryptogrphic methods, tools, and protocols.
Confidentiality supports the principle of "least privilege" by providing that only authorized individuals, processes, or systems should have access to information on a need-to-know basis. The level of access that an authorized individual should have is at the level necessary for them to do their job. In recent years, much press has been dedicated to the privacy of information and the need to protect it from individuals, who may be able to commit crimes by viewing the information. Identity theft is the act of assuming one's identity through knowledge of confidential information obtained from various sources.
The following are incorrect answers:
Capability is incorrect. Capability is relevant to access control. Capability-based security is a concept in the design of secure computing systems, one of the existing security models. A capability (known in some systems as a key) is a communicable, unforgeable token of authority. It refers to a value that references an object along with an associated set of access rights. A user program on a capability-based operating system must use a capability to access an object. Capability-based security refers to the principle of designing user programs such that they directly share capabilities with each other according to the principle of least privilege, and to the operating system infrastructure necessary to make such transactions efficient and secure.
Integrity is incorrect. Integrity protects information from unauthorized modification or loss.
Availability is incorrect. Availability assures that information and services are available for use by authorized entities according to the service level objective.
Reference(s) used for this question:
Hernandez CISSP, Steven (2012-12-21). Official (ISC)2 Guide to the CISSP CBK, Third Edition ((ISC)2 Press) (Kindle Locations 9345-9349). Auerbach Publications. Kindle Edition.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capability-based_security

Several analysis methods can be employed by an IDS, each with its own strengths and weaknesses, and their applicability to any given situation should be carefully considered.
There are two basic IDS analysis methods:
1.Pattern Matching (also called signature analysis), and
2.Anomaly detection
PATTERN MATCHING Some of the first IDS products used signature analysis as their detection method and simply looked for known characteristics of an attack (such as specific packet sequences or text in the data stream) to produce an alert if that pattern was detected. If a new or different attack vector is used, it will not match a known signature and, thus, slip past the IDS.
ANOMALY DETECTION Alternately, anomaly detection uses behavioral characteristics of a system's operation or network traffic to draw conclusions on whether the traffic represents a risk to the network or host. Anomalies may include but are not limited to:
Multiple failed log-on attempts Users logging in at strange hours Unexplained changes to system clocks Unusual error messages Unexplained system shutdowns or restarts Attempts to access restricted files
An anomaly-based IDS tends to produce more data because anything outside of the expected behavior is reported. Thus, they tend to report more false positives as expected behavior patterns change. An advantage to anomaly-based IDS is that, because they are based on behavior identification and not specific patterns of traffic, they are often able to detect new attacks that may be overlooked by a signature-based system. Often information from an anomaly-based IDS may be used to create a pattern for a signature-based IDS.
Host Based Intrusion Detection (HIDS) HIDS is the implementation of IDS capabilities at the host level. Its most significant difference from NIDS is that related processes are limited to the boundaries of a single-host system. However, this presents advantages in effectively detecting objectionable activities because the IDS process is running directly on the host system, not just observing it from the network. This offers unfettered access to system logs, processes, system information, and device information, and virtually eliminates limits associated with encryption. The level of integration represented by HIDS increases the level of visibility and control at the disposal of the HIDS application.
Network Based Intrustion Detection (NIDS) NIDS are usually incorporated into the network in a passive architecture, taking advantage of promiscuous mode access to the network. This means that it has visibility into every packet traversing the network segment. This allows the system to inspect packets and monitor sessions without impacting the network or the systems and applications utilizing the network.
Below you have other ways that instrusion detection can be performed:
Stateful Matching Intrusion Detection Stateful matching takes pattern matching to the next level. It scans for attack signatures in the context of a stream of traffic or overall system behavior rather than the individual packets or discrete system activities. For example, an attacker may use a tool that sends a volley of valid packets to a targeted system. Because all the packets are valid, pattern matching is nearly useless. However, the fact that a large volume of the packets was seen may, itself, represent a known or potential attack pattern. To evade attack, then, the attacker may send the packets from multiple locations with long wait periods between each transmission to either confuse the signature detection system or exhaust its session timing window. If the IDS service is tuned to record and analyze traffic over a long period of time it may detect such an attack. Because stateful matching also uses signatures, it too must be updated regularly and, thus, has some of the same limitations as pattern matching.
Statistical Anomaly-Based Intrusion Detection The statistical anomaly-based IDS analyzes event data by comparing it to typical, known, or predicted traffic profiles in an effort to find potential security breaches. It attempts to identify suspicious behavior by analyzing event data and identifying patterns of entries that deviate from a predicted norm. This type of detection method can be very effective and, at a very high level, begins to take on characteristics seen in IPS by establishing an expected baseline of behavior and acting on divergence from that baseline. However, there are some potential issues that may surface with a statistical IDS. Tuning the IDS can be challenging and, if not performed regularly, the system will be prone to false positives. Also, the definition of normal traffic can be open to interpretation and does not preclude an attacker from using normal activities to penetrate systems. Additionally, in a large, complex, dynamic corporate environment, it can be difficult, if not impossible, to clearly define "normal" traffic. The value of statistical analysis is that the system has the potential to detect previously unknown attacks. This is a huge departure from the limitation of matching previously known signatures. Therefore, when combined with signature matching technology, the statistical anomaly-based IDS can be very effective.
Protocol Anomaly-Based Intrusion Detection A protocol anomaly-based IDS identifies any unacceptable deviation from expected behavior based on known network protocols. For example, if the IDS is monitoring an HTTP session and the traffic contains attributes that deviate from established HTTP session protocol standards, the IDS may view that as a malicious attempt to manipulate the protocol, penetrate a firewall, or exploit a vulnerability. The value of this method is directly related to the use of well-known or well-defined protocols within an environment. If an organization primarily uses well-known protocols (such as HTTP, FTP, or telnet) this can be an effective method of performing intrusion detection. In the face of custom or nonstandard protocols, however, the system will have more difficulty or be completely unable to determine the proper packet format. Interestingly, this type of method is prone to the same challenges faced by signature-based IDSs. For example, specific protocol analysis modules may have to be added or customized to deal with unique or new protocols or unusual use of standard protocols. Nevertheless, having an IDS that is intimately aware of valid protocol use can be very powerful when an organization employs standard implementations of common protocols.
Traffic Anomaly-Based Intrusion Detection A traffic anomaly-based IDS identifies any unacceptable deviation from expected behavior based on actual traffic structure. When a session is established between systems, there is typically an expected pattern and behavior to the traffic transmitted in that session. That traffic can be compared to expected traffic conduct based on the understandings of traditional system interaction for that type of connection. Like the other types of anomaly-based IDS, traffic anomaly-based IDS relies on the ability to establish "normal" patterns of traffic and expected modes of behavior in systems, networks, and applications. In a highly dynamic environment it may be difficult, if not impossible, to clearly define these parameters.
Reference(s) used for this question:
Hernandez CISSP, Steven (2012-12-21). Official (ISC)2 Guide to the CISSP CBK, Third Edition ((ISC)2 Press) (Kindle Locations 3664-3686). Auerbach Publications. Kindle Edition. and Hernandez CISSP, Steven (2012-12-21). Official (ISC)2 Guide to the CISSP CBK, Third Edition ((ISC)2 Press) (Kindle Locations 3711-3734). Auerbach Publications. Kindle Edition. and Hernandez CISSP, Steven (2012-12-21). Official (ISC)2 Guide to the CISSP CBK, Third Edition ((ISC)2 Press) (Kindle Locations 3694-3711). Auerbach Publications. Kindle Edition.

Section: Risk, Response and Recovery
Explanation/Reference:
The incremental backup method usually resets the archive bit on the files after they have been backed up.
An Incremental Backup will backup all the files that have changed since the last Full Backup (the first time it is run after a full backup was previously completed) or after an Incremental Backup (for the second backup and subsequent backups) and sets the archive bit to 0. This type of backup take less time during the backup phase but it will take more time to restore.
The other answers are all incorrect choices.
The following backup types also exists:
Full Backup - All data are backed up. The archive bit is cleared, which means that it is set to 0.
Differential Backup - Backup the files that have been modified since the last Full Backup. The archive bit does not change. Take more time while the backup phase is performed and take less time to restore.
Reference(s) used for this question:
KRUTZ, Ronald L. & VINES, Russel D., The CISSP Prep Guide: Mastering the Ten Domains of Computer Security, 2001, John Wiley & Sons, Page 69.

Explanation/Reference:
Anything based on a fixed IP address would be a problem for mobile users because their location and its associated IP address can change from one time to the next. Many providers will assign a new IP every time the device would be restarted. For example an insurance adjuster using a laptop to file claims online.
He goes to a different client each time and the address changes every time he connects to the ISP.
NOTE FROM CLEMENT:
The term MOBILE in this case is synonymous with Road Warriors where a user is contantly traveling and changing location. With smartphone today that may not be an issue but it would be an issue for laptops or WIFI tablets. Within a carrier network the IP will tend to be the same and would change rarely. So this question is more applicable to devices that are not cellular devices but in some cases this issue could affect cellular devices as well.
The following answers are incorrect:
mechanism with reusable password. This is incorrect because reusable password mechanism would not present a problem for mobile users. They are the least secure and change only at specific interval.
one-time password mechanism. This is incorrect because a one-time password mechanism would not present a problem for mobile users. Many are based on a clock and not on the IP address of the user.
challenge response mechanism. This is incorrect because challenge response mechanism would not present a problem for mobile users.