On second thought, if you conceive of "technology" broadly enough, that could be the answer.  For example, if you say that a stone knife is technology, then that is certainly something that could exist in the state of nature.  But there surely would not be any "serious" technology like clocks.

Are you sure you have this question transcribed right?  The answer really should be F, but only if F is "none of the above."  This is because A-D are all characteristics of the state of nature.

Let us look at the following passage from Hobbes about the state of nature:

In such condition, there is no place for Industry; because the fruit thereof is uncertain; and consequently no Culture of the Earth; no Navigation, nor use of the commodities that may be imported by Sea; no commodious Building; no Instruments of moving, and removing such things as require much force; no Knowledge of the face of the Earth; no account of Time; no Arts; no Letters; no Society...

We can see quite clearly here that A through C are all true.  There is no "culture of the earth," no "industry," and no "account of time."  This makes sense.  If you could not protect your property, you would not go to the trouble of, say, planting a field only to have others come and steal your food.

This leaves only D as something that does NOT characterize life without society.  However, if there is "no society" there is no government.  If there is no government there can certainly be no police.

For these reasons, I would say that all of A-D characterize the state of nature for Hobbes.