Fortinet FCSS_SASE_AD-23 Practice Test Questions, Exam Dumps

Practice Exams:

View All

FCSS_SASE_AD-23 Fortinet Practice Test Questions and Exam Dumps

Question No 1:

The daily report for application usage shows an unusually high number of unknown applications by category. What are two possible explanations for this? (Choose two.)

A. Certificate inspection is not being used to scan application traffic.
B. The inline-CASB application control profile does not have application categories set to Monitor.
C. Zero trust network access (ZTNA) tags are not being used to tag the correct users.
D. Deep inspection is not being used to scan traffic.

Correct answers: A and D

Explanation:

When a daily report indicates an unusually high number of unknown applications, it typically means that the system is unable to identify or classify a significant portion of the traffic. This usually points to an inspection or visibility issue in how the traffic is being analyzed. Let's evaluate each of the answer choices to identify the correct explanations.

A refers to certificate inspection, which is essential for identifying applications that use SSL/TLS encryption. Many modern applications encrypt their traffic by default. Without certificate inspection (often referred to as SSL decryption), the firewall or application visibility engine cannot look into the encrypted packets to determine which application is being used. Instead, this traffic is labeled as "unknown SSL" or "unknown TCP." Therefore, the lack of certificate inspection can result in a high number of unknown applications being reported, making A a valid explanation.

B talks about inline-CASB application control profiles and their monitoring settings. While inline-CASB is important for controlling access to SaaS applications and enforcing policy compliance, not having categories set to "Monitor" would primarily affect logging and enforcement, not visibility. Furthermore, it wouldn't directly result in applications being marked as "unknown." Rather, it would limit the control and alerting mechanisms. Therefore, while this could affect how data is analyzed or used for policy, it is not a primary reason for applications appearing as unknown. Thus, B is not a correct answer.

C mentions ZTNA tags. Zero Trust Network Access is focused on user- and device-based access control, not application identification. The absence of ZTNA tags may impact user-level attribution, but it does not affect whether or not an application can be identified by the system. Therefore, C is not relevant to the issue of unknown applications and should not be selected.

D discusses deep inspection, which is a broader term that can refer to deep packet inspection (DPI). DPI examines the actual contents of the traffic, not just headers or metadata. Without DPI, application identification may rely solely on port numbers or destination IPs, which are often insufficient for modern applications, especially those that tunnel traffic or use dynamic ports. If DPI is not enabled, the firewall or visibility system might not be able to accurately classify traffic, resulting in a significant number of applications being marked as "unknown." Therefore, D is also a valid explanation.

In conclusion, the two most plausible explanations for the high number of unknown applications are:

Lack of certificate inspection prevents analysis of encrypted traffic.
Lack of deep inspection (DPI) limits the system's ability to identify applications based on payload analysis.

Question No 2:

What are two benefits of implementing zero-trust tags in a security framework? (Select two options.)

A. Zero-trust tags can be used to allow or deny access to network resources.
B. Zero-trust tags can determine the security posture of an endpoint.
C. Zero-trust tags can be used to create multiple endpoint profiles which can be applied to different endpoints.
D. Zero-trust tags can be used to allow secure web gateway (SWG) access.

Correct answers: A, B

Explanation:

Zero-trust architecture is a cybersecurity model that operates on the principle of "never trust, always verify." Rather than assuming that everything behind a corporate firewall is safe, zero-trust treats all access attempts as potential threats and verifies them explicitly. One of the tools used in enforcing this model is zero-trust tags—metadata labels applied to endpoints or users based on attributes such as location, device health, user role, or behavior.

Let’s go through each of the options to determine which ones best represent valid advantages of zero-trust tags.

Option A: Zero-trust tags can be used to allow or deny access to network resources.
This is a valid advantage. Zero-trust tags are often used to define policy-based access control. These tags allow security administrators to create dynamic access policies based on the presence or absence of specific tags. For instance, if an endpoint is tagged as "compliant" or "trusted," it may be allowed access to sensitive resources, whereas an endpoint tagged as "non-compliant" or "untrusted" may be denied. This tag-based policy enforcement allows granular control of who can access what, when, and under what circumstances, making it a fundamental benefit of using zero-trust tags.

Option B: Zero-trust tags can determine the security posture of an endpoint.
This is also correct. Zero-trust tags are often assigned based on the real-time posture of an endpoint, including factors like antivirus status, OS patch levels, disk encryption status, or the presence of prohibited software. These tags reflect the health and security state of the endpoint. By tagging endpoints based on posture, organizations can enforce conditional access policies that restrict access from vulnerable or risky devices. Thus, tags play a critical role in visibility and enforcement based on posture.

Option C: Zero-trust tags can be used to create multiple endpoint profiles which can be applied to different endpoints.
This is not accurate. While endpoint profiles may include conditions that involve zero-trust tags, the creation of multiple endpoint profiles is a separate mechanism often handled by device management or endpoint protection tools. Tags themselves don’t "create" profiles—they are more like attributes used within those profiles or policies. Therefore, saying that tags create profiles overstates their function.

Option D: Zero-trust tags can be used to allow secure web gateway (SWG) access.
This statement is partially misleading. While zero-trust policies can govern access to web resources and SWGs can be a part of that architecture, tags are not the mechanism that directly "allows" SWG access. SWG access is usually governed by broader network and security policies, possibly informed by tags, but it's inaccurate to say that zero-trust tags by themselves enable SWG access. This option confuses the role of tags with policy enforcement tools.

In summary, Option A and Option B correctly highlight key advantages of zero-trust tags: they control access to network resources and determine endpoint security posture. Options C and D either misrepresent or overextend the role of tags in the broader security architecture.

Question No 3:

A FortiSASE administrator is trying to configure FortiSASE as a spoke to a FortiGate hub. The VPN tunnel does not establish. Based on the provided configuration, what configuration needs to be modified to bring the tunnel up?

A. NAT needs to be enabled in the Spoke-to-Hub firewall policy.

B. The BGP router ID needs to match on the hub and FortiSASE.

C. FortiSASE spoke devices do not support mode config.

D. The hub needs IKEv2 enabled in the IPsec phase 1 settings.

Answer: D

Explanation:

When configuring FortiSASE as a spoke in a hub-and-spoke VPN topology with a FortiGate hub, it's essential to ensure that both ends of the VPN tunnel are correctly configured to establish a secure connection. One critical aspect of this configuration is the IPsec Phase 1 settings, which define the parameters for the initial phase of the VPN tunnel establishment.

IKEv2 Protocol Requirement

FortiSASE, when acting as a spoke, requires the use of the IKEv2 protocol for the IPsec Phase 1 settings. IKEv2 offers several advantages over its predecessor, IKEv1, including improved security features, better support for modern encryption algorithms, and enhanced reliability in establishing and maintaining VPN connections. Therefore, to ensure compatibility and successful tunnel establishment, the FortiGate hub must have IKEv2 enabled in its IPsec Phase 1 settings.

Configuration Steps

To enable IKEv2 on the FortiGate hub:

Access the FortiGate Configuration Interface: Log in to the FortiGate device's management interface.
Navigate to VPN Settings: Go to the VPN section and select the IPsec Tunnels option.
Modify the Existing Tunnel or Create a New One: Either edit the existing tunnel configuration intended for the FortiSASE spoke or create a new tunnel configuration.
Select IKEv2 as the Protocol: In the Phase 1 settings, ensure that IKEv2 is selected as the protocol. This setting dictates the use of IKEv2 for the initial phase of the VPN tunnel establishment.
Review and Apply Other Settings: Verify that other settings, such as authentication methods, encryption algorithms, and peer IP addresses, are correctly configured to match the FortiSASE spoke's configuration.
Save and Apply the Configuration: After making the necessary changes, save the configuration and apply the changes to activate the new settings.

By enabling IKEv2 on the FortiGate hub, the tunnel establishment process becomes compatible with FortiSASE's requirements, thereby resolving issues related to tunnel initiation failures.

Other Options Analysis

A. NAT needs to be enabled in the Spoke-to-Hub firewall policy: While Network Address Translation (NAT) can be necessary in certain scenarios, it is not a default requirement for FortiSASE spoke configurations. Enabling NAT should be considered based on specific network design needs and is not typically the cause of tunnel establishment failures unless there's a specific need for it.
B. The BGP router ID needs to match on the hub and FortiSASE: Border Gateway Protocol (BGP) configurations, including router IDs, are crucial for routing and network topology purposes. However, BGP router IDs do not directly impact the establishment of the IPsec VPN tunnel itself. Mismatched BGP router IDs would affect routing and not the initial tunnel setup.
C. FortiSASE spoke devices do not support mode config: Mode Configuration is related to the assignment of IP addresses and other settings in VPN configurations. FortiSASE devices are capable of supporting mode config, and its absence would not typically prevent the establishment of the VPN tunnel. The primary concern is ensuring that the correct VPN protocols and settings are used.

In conclusion, to resolve the issue of the VPN tunnel not establishing between FortiSASE as a spoke and a FortiGate hub, enabling IKEv2 in the IPsec Phase 1 settings on the FortiGate hub is the necessary configuration change. This adjustment ensures compatibility and facilitates the successful establishment of the VPN tunnel.

Question No 4:

How will traffic be routed when remote users connected to FortiSASE require access to internal resources on Branch-2?

A. FortiSASE will use the SD-WAN capability and determine that traffic will be directed to HUB-2, which will then route traffic to Branch-2.
B. FortiSASE will use the AD VPN protocol and determine that traffic will be directed to Branch-2 directly, using a static route.
C. FortiSASE will use the SD-WAN capability and determine that traffic will be directed to HUB-1, which will then route traffic to Branch-2.
D. FortiSASE will use the AD VPN protocol and determine that traffic will be directed to Branch-2 directly, using a dynamic route.

Correct Answer: C

Explanation:

In this scenario, the traffic routing from remote users connected to FortiSASE to access internal resources on Branch-2 involves several networking protocols and routing techniques. Let's break down the options to understand the correct routing behavior.

A. SD-WAN routing to HUB-2
SD-WAN (Software-Defined Wide Area Network) is a technology that enables dynamic traffic routing based on application performance, network conditions, and business policies. However, if FortiSASE uses SD-WAN to direct traffic to HUB-2, it would be a less common setup for a branch-to-branch connection. Typically, SD-WAN optimizes traffic to the nearest optimal location, and HUB-2 would not be the primary location for traffic headed directly to Branch-2. This routing path is not ideal when considering a direct connection to Branch-2. Therefore, A is not the correct answer.

B. AD VPN with a static route to Branch-2
AD VPN (Active Directory VPN) is not typically used in routing protocols between FortiSASE and a branch network. Furthermore, a static route implies a manual and predefined route, which does not dynamically adjust based on changing network conditions. While static routing can be used, it is more rigid and less efficient than dynamic routing methods. In this case, the traffic would not be optimally routed, and using a static route to Branch-2 directly would not allow for efficient handling of network changes. This makes B an unlikely choice.

C. SD-WAN routing to HUB-1
In this case, FortiSASE uses SD-WAN, which optimizes traffic routing based on current network conditions and priorities. SD-WAN is designed to ensure traffic follows the most efficient path. If the traffic needs to access Branch-2, FortiSASE would likely route it via HUB-1, which serves as an optimal transit point between the remote users and Branch-2. HUB-1 would likely be a central hub that aggregates and routes traffic to various branch locations, ensuring efficient routing to Branch-2. Therefore, this routing path is the most logical and optimal choice. C is the correct answer.

D. AD VPN with a dynamic route to Branch-2
While dynamic routing does provide more flexibility than static routing, AD VPN is not a typical method for routing traffic in this scenario, especially for FortiSASE. The dynamic route aspect is more applicable to systems using traditional routing protocols like OSPF or BGP rather than AD VPN. Since this option suggests a VPN connection with dynamic routing specifically pointing to Branch-2, it would not be the ideal method for efficient traffic flow compared to SD-WAN routing. Therefore, D is not the correct answer.

To summarize, C is the best answer because it describes the most optimal and efficient routing method, using SD-WAN to direct traffic through HUB-1, which then routes traffic to Branch-2. This setup ensures that remote users’ traffic is efficiently routed to the correct destination based on network conditions and optimal path selection.

Question No 5:

A FortiSASE administrator has configured an antivirus profile in the security profile group and applied it to the internet access policy. Remote users are still able to download the eicar.com-zip file. Traffic logs show traffic is allowed by the policy.

Which configuration on FortiSASE is allowing users to perform the download?

A. Web filter is allowing the traffic.
B. IPS is disabled in the security profile group.
C. The HTTPS protocol is not enabled in the antivirus profile.
D. Force certificate inspection is enabled in the policy.

Correct answer: C

Explanation:

In this scenario, the administrator has applied an antivirus profile, which should ideally detect and block any malicious downloads, such as the eicar.com-zip file. However, since remote users are still able to download the file, the issue likely lies in how FortiSASE handles traffic inspection, specifically HTTPS traffic.

To analyze HTTPS traffic (such as the one coming , FortiSASE must decrypt the traffic to inspect it for potential threats, including viruses in downloaded files. If HTTPS traffic decryption is not properly configured or the antivirus profile does not cover the HTTPS protocol, the antivirus engine cannot scan the contents of HTTPS traffic. This would allow users to download potentially harmful files, bypassing the antivirus profile.

Option A (Web filter allowing the traffic) is not the most likely cause because the web filter typically controls access to sites and would block or allow traffic based on URL filtering settings. While a web filter might allow access to the site, the issue here seems related to the antivirus profile's inability to scan HTTPS traffic.

Option B (IPS disabled in the security profile group) is unlikely to be the primary cause in this case. Intrusion Prevention System (IPS) is typically used to detect and block network-based threats, not to specifically handle antivirus scanning of downloaded files. While IPS could catch other types of threats, it wouldn't directly explain why the antivirus profile is not detecting the downloaded file.

Option C (The HTTPS protocol is not enabled in the antivirus profile) is the most likely reason. If the antivirus profile is not configured to inspect HTTPS traffic, it would fail to scan the eicar.com-zip file being downloaded over HTTPS. Since HTTPS traffic is encrypted, FortiSASE needs the ability to decrypt and inspect it, which requires explicit configuration in the antivirus profile. If HTTPS is not enabled for inspection, the antivirus engine cannot detect the malicious file.

Option D (Force certificate inspection is enabled in the policy) refers to a setting that forces SSL inspection. While SSL certificate inspection can sometimes impact how HTTPS traffic is handled, the main issue here revolves around the antivirus profile’s inability to inspect the traffic for viruses. Force certificate inspection alone would not explain why the antivirus profile isn’t detecting the malicious file.

Therefore, the key issue here is that the antivirus profile is likely not configured to inspect HTTPS traffic, leading to the download being allowed despite the antivirus settings.

Question No 6:

What configuration must be applied to inspect all endpoint internet traffic on FortiSASE while excluding Google Maps traffic from the VPN tunnel and redirecting it to the endpoint physical interface?

A. Exempt the Google Maps FQDN from the endpoint system proxy settings.
B. Configure a static route with the Google Maps FQDN on the endpoint to redirect traffic.
C. Configure the Google Maps FQDN as a split tunneling destination on the FortiSASE endpoint profile.
D. Change the default DNS server configuration on FortiSASE to use the endpoint system DNS.

Correct Answer: C

Explanation:

To meet the company's requirement of inspecting all endpoint internet traffic while excluding Google Maps traffic from being tunneled through FortiSASE and redirecting it to the physical interface of the endpoint, the solution must utilize split tunneling. Split tunneling allows for selective routing of traffic, where some traffic is sent through the VPN tunnel (in this case, FortiSASE), while other traffic, such as Google Maps, bypasses the VPN and uses the endpoint’s regular physical interface. Now, let’s break down each option:

Option A: Exempt the Google Maps FQDN from the endpoint system proxy settings

This option suggests exempting Google Maps from the endpoint's system proxy settings. However, this action alone would not achieve the required split tunneling. While you could configure the proxy settings to exclude certain domains, this is generally not how FortiSASE handles traffic routing. The primary issue here is that the FortiSASE configuration is focused on controlling traffic flow via split tunneling, not by proxy exemption. Therefore, A is not the best solution.

Option B: Configure a static route with the Google Maps FQDN on the endpoint to redirect traffic

Configuring a static route with the Google Maps FQDN on the endpoint could be a part of a routing strategy, but it would require precise and potentially complex manual setup. Typically, FortiSASE is used to inspect and manage traffic based on policy rather than relying solely on static routing. In addition, this method might not allow the same level of dynamic control over domain-based traffic as split tunneling does. As a result, B is less practical for the scenario described and is not the correct choice.

Option C: Configure the Google Maps FQDN as a split tunneling destination on the FortiSASE endpoint profile

This is the correct solution. Split tunneling allows certain destinations to be excluded from the VPN tunnel. By configuring the Google Maps FQDN (Fully Qualified Domain Name) as a split tunneling destination, traffic to Google Maps will bypass the FortiSASE VPN tunnel and instead use the physical interface of the endpoint directly. This setup ensures that all other internet traffic is routed through the FortiSASE VPN tunnel for inspection, while traffic to Google Maps is excluded from inspection and routed through the endpoint’s regular network connection. This method is the most effective and aligned with the goal of selectively routing traffic.

Option D: Change the default DNS server configuration on FortiSASE to use the endpoint system DNS

Changing the DNS server configuration on FortiSASE to use the endpoint’s DNS would not directly address the need for split tunneling. DNS is responsible for resolving domain names to IP addresses, but it does not control how traffic is routed once the traffic has been resolved. This option would not prevent Google Maps traffic from entering the VPN tunnel; it only changes where domain resolutions occur. Therefore, D is not the correct approach.

In conclusion, the best solution for this scenario is to configure split tunneling for Google Maps traffic. This allows FortiSASE to handle most traffic through the VPN tunnel while excluding Google Maps traffic and routing it through the endpoint’s physical interface. Therefore, the correct answer is C.

Question No 7:

Which web filter configuration must you change on FortiSASE to allow access?

A. FortiGuard category-based filter
B. Content filter
C. URL Filter
D. Inline cloud access security broker (CASB) headers

Correct Answer: C

Explanation:

When configuring web filtering on FortiSASE (Fortinet's Secure Access Service Edge solution), various methods can be used to control access to websites and online resources. The key to enabling or blocking access is based on the specific filters and rules set in place. Let’s go over each option to determine which one directly relates to allowing access.

Option A: FortiGuard category-based filter
The FortiGuard category-based filter is a type of filtering that blocks or allows web traffic based on the classification of the website or domain (e.g., social media, gaming, etc.). This filter provides a categorical approach to web filtering, meaning it can block or allow websites based on their categorization. However, this does not directly change or enable access for specific sites. Rather, it would block or allow based on broad categories. Therefore, this option doesn't directly allow access on its own but instead categorizes sites for filtering. A is incorrect.

Option B: Content filter
A content filter typically blocks or allows web traffic based on specific content found within the site. For example, this might filter out explicit content, restrict certain keywords, or look for dangerous elements in a website's code. While content filters are essential for restricting access, they are typically not used to allow access unless configured to whitelist content. This is not the most direct method to allow access but would be useful in preventing specific content from appearing. Therefore, B is incorrect.

Option C: URL Filter
A URL filter is one of the most common and direct ways to allow or block access to specific websites based on their URLs. When you modify the URL filter settings, you can whitelist certain URLs to ensure they are accessible, or you can block specific URLs to prevent access. This makes the URL filter the primary tool for controlling access to websites in FortiSASE. To allow access, you would specifically modify the URL filter by either removing blocks or adding exceptions for certain websites. Therefore, C is correct.

Option D: Inline cloud access security broker (CASB) headers
The Inline cloud access security broker (CASB) headers option is related to the management of cloud-based applications and services. CASB solutions help enforce security policies for cloud applications, including user access control, data loss prevention, and activity monitoring. While CASB headers are essential for regulating access to cloud-based services and enforcing security policies, they are not directly related to allowing access to websites in the same way as URL filters. D is incorrect.

Summary:
To directly enable access on FortiSASE, the URL filter configuration is the most appropriate. This filter allows you to define which URLs should be accessible and which should be blocked. Adjusting this filter can directly control access to specific websites, making C the correct answer..

Question No 8:

Which reason best explains why Win7-Pro can no longer access the internet, despite being on the same remote location as Win10-Pro, which can access the internet through FortiSASE?

A. The Win7-Pro device posture has changed.
B. Win7-Pro cannot reach the FortiSASE SSL VPN gateway.
C. The Win7-Pro FortiClient version does not match the FortiSASE endpoint requirement.
D. Win7-Pro has exceeded the total vulnerability detected threshold.

Answer: C

Explanation:

In this scenario, the issue is that Win7-Pro can no longer access the internet via FortiSASE, while Win10-Pro can still connect and access the internet. This suggests that the problem is specifically related to the configuration or compatibility of Win7-Pro's setup with the FortiSASE solution, particularly around its FortiClient configuration.

Option C is the correct answer because it suggests that Win7-Pro's FortiClient version does not meet the FortiSASE endpoint requirements. FortiSASE, which is Fortinet’s Security-as-a-Service offering, requires that endpoint devices, including those using FortiClient, comply with specific version requirements and configurations to ensure proper network access. If the version of FortiClient on Win7-Pro is outdated or incompatible with the FortiSASE platform, it could lead to a failure in establishing a secure connection, resulting in no internet access. This is a common issue when an endpoint device runs an unsupported version of FortiClient, or if there's a mismatch between the endpoint and FortiSASE’s security requirements.

Option A could also be a plausible explanation in some cases. If the device posture of Win7-Pro changed, for example, if the device was no longer compliant with FortiSASE’s security requirements, it could result in the device being unable to connect to the network. However, posture changes are typically flagged and managed through endpoint compliance policies, and there’s no explicit mention of such a change in the question context.

Option B is less likely because the issue doesn’t suggest that Win7-Pro can’t reach the FortiSASE SSL VPN gateway. If that were the case, it would typically affect both devices in a similar way, but Win10-Pro is still able to access the internet, which indicates that the connection to the VPN gateway is likely fine on the Win7-Pro device.

Option D suggests that Win7-Pro might have exceeded the vulnerability detection threshold in FortiSASE, which would trigger a block of internet access to prevent potential security risks. While this could be a valid concern, the issue described seems more related to FortiClient version incompatibility or configuration, not an immediate vulnerability detection scenario.

Thus, Option C is the most likely cause of the problem, where the FortiClient version on Win7-Pro does not align with the requirements set by FortiSASE, preventing the device from accessing the internet.

Question No 9:

A FortiSASE administrator is trying to configure FortiSASE as a spoke to a FortiGate hub. The tunnel is up to the FortiGate hub. However, the administrator is not able to ping the Webserver hosted behind the FortiGate hub.

Based on the output, what is the reason for the ping failures?

A. The Secure Private Access (SPA) policy needs to allow PING service.
B. Quick mode selectors are restricting the subnet.
C. The BGP route is not received.
D. Network address translation (NAT) is not enabled on the spoke-to-hub policy.

Correct answer: B

Explanation:

When troubleshooting network issues like this, where a tunnel is up between a FortiGate hub and a FortiSASE spoke, but communication, in this case, a ping, is failing to reach a webserver behind the FortiGate hub, it is crucial to examine several factors, particularly how the tunnel and routing are configured. Based on the provided options, the correct cause of the issue is likely related to quick mode selectors restricting the subnet, as described in option B.

Quick Mode Selectors and Subnet Restrictions: The quick mode selectors in an IPsec tunnel configuration determine which network subnets can communicate over the tunnel. These selectors are a part of the IPsec policy and define the IP address ranges allowed for communication between the two peers. If the selectors are incorrectly configured, they could block specific subnets or services, including the webserver in question. Since the tunnel itself is up but the ping fails, it strongly indicates that the selectors are too restrictive and are preventing the FortiSASE device from reaching the specific subnet behind the FortiGate.
Secure Private Access (SPA) Policy: Option A, suggesting that the SPA policy needs to allow PING service, is a possibility but less likely in this scenario. SPA policies typically govern access to private applications and services. If the tunnel were working but the issue were related to a specific application or service, such as the webserver, then this would be a possible cause. However, since the tunnel is up and the ping fails, it's more likely to be an issue with the routing or selector configuration.
BGP Route Not Received: Option C, suggesting that the BGP route is not received, could be a cause if dynamic routing was in place and BGP was used to exchange routes. If BGP fails to advertise the correct routes between the FortiGate hub and FortiSASE, then the spoke device may not know how to route traffic properly. However, this is less likely to be the issue if the tunnel is established and only the ping is failing. If the routes were truly missing, the tunnel likely wouldn't be functional at all.
NAT Configuration: Option D, regarding Network Address Translation (NAT) not being enabled on the spoke-to-hub policy, could be relevant in some situations where IP address translation is required. However, if the tunnel is up and routing seems functional, this is less likely the root cause. NAT configuration typically impacts traffic flowing across different network boundaries, but the ping failure here suggests a more specific issue with the selectors or routing within the tunnel.

In conclusion, option B is the most likely cause. The quick mode selectors in the IPsec tunnel configuration likely restrict the subnets that can communicate, leading to the ping failure even though the tunnel is up. Proper configuration of these selectors should resolve the issue.

Question No 10:

The organization wants to block all video and audio application traffic but grant access to videos from CNN. What application override action must you configure in the Application Control with Inline-CASB?

A. Allow
B. Pass
C. Permit
D. Exempt

Answer: D

Explanation:

To accomplish the organization's objective of blocking all video and audio application traffic while granting access to videos from CNN, you need to use an "Exempt" action in the Application Control with Inline-CASB (Cloud Access Security Broker). Here’s why:

Application Control and Inline-CASB are security measures designed to manage and secure cloud services, applications, and their data flows. These tools can apply specific security policies, allowing or blocking particular types of traffic based on pre-set rules.

The goal here is to block all video and audio content but still allow access to CNN's video streams. In this scenario, the "Exempt" option is the best choice because:

Exempt allows the specific application traffic to bypass the general policy. In this case, by applying an exempt rule for CNN's video traffic, the system will still block other video and audio traffic but make an exception for CNN's streams.
Allow, Pass, and Permit are not suitable for this use case. These options typically imply granting unrestricted access or allowing the application to pass through without much control, which would not meet the requirement of blocking most video and audio traffic.
Allow and Permit are generally used to explicitly grant access to traffic, while Pass usually means to let the traffic go through without enforcement, both of which would not give the fine-grained control needed in this situation. The overriding requirement is to grant an exception, not to allow or pass all video and audio traffic.

Thus, the Exempt option gives you the necessary control to block most video and audio traffic while making an exception for CNN’s videos, meeting the organization’s need.