Netskope NSK100 Practice Test Questions, Exam Dumps

Practice Exams:

View All

NSK100 Netskope Practice Test Questions and Exam Dumps

Question 1

A customer wants to detect misconfigurations in their AWS cloud instances. In this scenario, which Netskope feature would you recommend to the customer?

A. Netskope Secure Web Gateway (SWG)
B. Netskope Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM)
C. Netskope Advanced DLP and Threat Protection
D. Netskope SaaS Security Posture Management (SSPM)

Correct Answer:  B

Explanation:

In this scenario, the customer is concerned with misconfigurations in their AWS cloud instances. Misconfigurations can lead to vulnerabilities, data exposure, and other security issues, so addressing this concern requires a solution that specifically focuses on cloud security posture and configuration management.

Here's why B is the correct answer:

Option B: Netskope Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM)
Netskope Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) is specifically designed to help customers detect misconfigurations and ensure compliance in their cloud environments, including AWS. CSPM tools provide visibility into cloud services, continuously monitor configurations, and automatically detect any misconfigurations that might lead to security risks. This includes identifying insecure access permissions, improperly configured storage buckets, and other issues that could compromise cloud infrastructure security. Since the customer's primary goal is to detect misconfigurations in their AWS instances, CSPM is the most appropriate feature to recommend.

Now, let's break down why the other options are not correct:

Option A: Netskope Secure Web Gateway (SWG)
The Secure Web Gateway (SWG) is designed to secure web traffic by providing visibility and control over user internet activity. While SWG can help manage and monitor traffic to and from cloud services, it does not focus on detecting misconfigurations in cloud infrastructure like AWS. It’s more concerned with web traffic filtering and threat protection than with cloud security posture.
Option C: Netskope Advanced DLP and Threat Protection
Advanced Data Loss Prevention (DLP) and Threat Protection focus on protecting sensitive data from exfiltration and securing against potential threats (e.g., malware, phishing). While these features are critical for security, they do not address cloud misconfigurations or configuration issues in cloud infrastructure such as AWS. DLP and threat protection are more about data integrity and security rather than configuration management.

In conclusion, Netskope Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) is the best tool for detecting misconfigurations in AWS cloud instances, making it the most appropriate choice for this scenario.

Question 2

You just deployed the Netskope client in Web mode and several users mention that their messenger application is no longer working. Although you have a specific real-time policy that allows this application, upon further investigation you discover that it is using proprietary encryption.

You need to permit access to all the users and maintain some visibility. In this scenario, which configuration change would accomplish this task?

A. Change the real-time policy to block the messenger application.
B. Create a new custom cloud application using the custom connector that can be used in the real-time policy.
C. Add a policy in the SSL decryption section to bypass the messenger domain(s).
D. Edit the steering configuration and add a steering exception for the messenger application.

Correct Answer: C

Explanation:

In this situation, you are dealing with a messenger application that uses proprietary encryption which is interfering with the visibility and enforcement of your real-time policy, even though the application is allowed by the policy. To solve this problem, you need to permit access for all users while maintaining some level of visibility and ensuring that the messenger application works as expected.

Here’s why C is the correct answer:

Option C: Add a policy in the SSL decryption section to bypass the messenger domain(s).
The issue seems to be related to the fact that the messenger application uses proprietary encryption, which could mean the traffic is SSL-encrypted or uses other encryption methods that bypass traditional inspection. By configuring a policy in the SSL decryption section to bypass the domain(s) associated with the messenger application, you can allow the application to function properly while bypassing the encryption inspection. This will maintain user access without breaking functionality, as SSL decryption is often needed for visibility and policy enforcement in web-based applications. By bypassing SSL decryption for the messenger’s domain, you are ensuring that the application works for users while still allowing Netskope to apply policies to other traffic.

Let’s review why the other options are not suitable:

Option A: Change the real-time policy to block the messenger application.
This would block the messenger application, which directly contradicts the goal of permitting access for users to use the application. It would not address the need for maintaining visibility and access. Blocking the app would only solve the problem temporarily by stopping traffic, but it would not allow continued access or address the visibility concern.
Option B: Create a new custom cloud application using the custom connector that can be used in the real-time policy.
Creating a custom application in the real-time policy might be useful in some cases, but it would require a deep understanding of how the proprietary encryption is working and might be overcomplicating the situation. Additionally, creating a custom connector does not inherently solve the issue of SSL encryption or traffic visibility. It may provide visibility into the application, but it doesn't ensure that the traffic is decrypted or bypassed properly for the messenger app.
Option D: Edit the steering configuration and add a steering exception for the messenger application.
Steering configuration helps determine how traffic is routed through Netskope, but it doesn't directly address encryption or visibility concerns related to proprietary or SSL-encrypted traffic. Adding a steering exception would alter how the traffic is routed but does not solve the underlying issue of visibility into encrypted traffic. Steering exceptions are generally useful for routing traffic based on certain conditions, but they don't fix encryption-related problems.

To sum up, the most appropriate solution is to adjust the SSL decryption policy to bypass the messenger’s encrypted traffic, which ensures continued access for users and minimizes the impact on other traffic that is subject to policy enforcement and visibility.

Question 3

What are two fundamental differences between the inline and API implementation of the Netskope platform? (Choose two.)

A. The API implementation can be used with both sanctioned and unsanctioned applications.
B. The API implementation can only be used with sanctioned applications.
C. The inline implementation can effectively block a transaction in both sanctioned and unsanctioned applications.
D. The inline implementation can only effectively block a transaction in sanctioned applications.

Correct Answers: A and C

Explanation:

The Netskope platform offers two main methods for implementing cloud security: the inline implementation and the API implementation. Both methods are used to secure cloud applications, but they differ in terms of deployment, functionality, and scope of application.

Let's break down the two fundamental differences:

API Implementation

The API implementation leverages the APIs provided by cloud applications to interact with and enforce policies without requiring traffic to be routed through the platform. This method is non-intrusive and works by accessing and controlling the cloud application directly.

Option A: The API implementation can be used with both sanctioned and unsanctioned applications.
Correct. The API-based approach allows you to secure both sanctioned (approved) and unsanctioned (shadow IT) applications. Since the API is typically integrated directly into the cloud service, you can monitor, enforce policies, and apply controls without needing to route traffic. This makes it versatile and effective for both types of applications, as long as the cloud service offers API access. For unsanctioned applications, which might not be visible via traditional network methods, the API implementation can provide visibility and control.
Option B: The API implementation can only be used with sanctioned applications.
Incorrect. As mentioned above, the API implementation is not restricted to just sanctioned applications. It can be applied to both sanctioned and unsanctioned apps, making it more flexible in cloud environments where the application landscape is often a mix of both types.

Inline Implementation

The inline implementation is more intrusive as it involves routing traffic through the Netskope platform (via a proxy or other inline method) to inspect and enforce policies. This method is more direct and allows for real-time policy enforcement and blocking.

Option C: The inline implementation can effectively block a transaction in both sanctioned and unsanctioned applications.
Correct. The inline approach enables Netskope to inspect and block transactions in both sanctioned and unsanctioned applications because traffic from all applications passes through the inline solution. This gives the platform the ability to block transactions in real-time for both types of applications. Since the traffic is routed through the platform, it is easier to apply strict access control and blocking policies.
Option D: The inline implementation can only effectively block a transaction in sanctioned applications.
Incorrect. The inline implementation is capable of blocking transactions in both sanctioned and unsanctioned applications because all traffic is routed through the inline proxy. This enables blocking across a broader range of applications, regardless of whether they are officially sanctioned or not. The inline method does not have the same limitations as the API implementation, which requires API access to control unsanctioned apps.

The API implementation is ideal for both sanctioned and unsanctioned cloud applications, allowing for visibility and control without routing traffic through the platform.
The inline implementation enables full visibility and the ability to block transactions in both sanctioned and unsanctioned applications because all traffic is routed through the platform.

Question 4

A customer asks you to create several real-time policies. Policy A generates alerts when any user downloads, uploads, or shares files on a cloud storage application. Policy B blocks users from downloading files from any operating system (OS) other than Mac or Windows for cloud storage.

In this case, policy A is least restrictive and policy B is more restrictive. Which statement is correct in this scenario?

A. Policy A is implemented before policy B.
B. Policy B is implemented before policy A.
C. The policy order is not important; policies are independent of each other.
D. These two policies would actually not work together.

Correct Answer: A

Explanation:

In this scenario, the two policies are designed to address different aspects of user activity in relation to cloud storage applications. Policy A is designed to generate alerts based on file activities like downloads, uploads, or sharing, while Policy B is more restrictive, blocking downloads from operating systems other than Mac or Windows. The question asks which policy is implemented first.

Let's break down the options:

Option A: Policy A is implemented before policy B.

Correct. Policies in the Netskope platform are typically evaluated in order of their restriction level. Since Policy A is least restrictive (it only generates alerts without blocking any actions), it is implemented first. This allows it to monitor the activity without blocking it, and any actions that trigger Policy A’s alerts are then evaluated against Policy B, which is more restrictive. Since Policy B blocks actions, it would apply after Policy A and potentially block the download if the conditions are met (e.g., the OS is not Mac or Windows).

Option B: Policy B is implemented before policy A.

Incorrect. Policy B is more restrictive, as it actively blocks actions based on the OS. In a typical real-time policy setup, the least restrictive policies are applied first, followed by more restrictive policies. If Policy B were implemented first, it would block actions before Policy A could generate any alerts or log the event, which does not make sense in this context where the goal is to log first and block second.

Option C: The policy order is not important; policies are independent of each other.

Incorrect. The order of policies does matter in the Netskope platform because more restrictive policies are meant to override or block actions, while less restrictive policies (like alerting) do not. The platform evaluates policies in the order of their enforcement level, meaning more restrictive ones come after less restrictive ones to avoid unnecessarily blocking actions that should be logged first.

Option D: These two policies would actually not work together.

Incorrect. There is nothing in the setup of these two policies that would prevent them from working together. They address different types of actions: Policy A monitors and alerts on file activities, while Policy B blocks downloads based on the OS. These policies can coexist, with Policy A generating alerts and Policy B blocking certain downloads when necessary. The policies are complementary, not conflicting.

Since Policy A is less restrictive (only generating alerts) and Policy B is more restrictive (blocking downloads), Policy A should be implemented first to generate the alerts before any actions are blocked by Policy B. This allows for the monitoring of activities before applying the block.

Question 5

What are two CASB inline interception use cases? (Choose two.)

A. Blocking file uploads to a personal Box account
B. Running a retroactive scan for data at rest in Google Drive
C. Using the Netskope steering client to provide user alerts when sensitive information is posted in Slack
D. Scanning Dropbox for credit card information

Correct Answers: A and D

Explanation:

A CASB (Cloud Access Security Broker) works to enforce policies for cloud services by either intercepting or inspecting cloud traffic in real-time (inline) or by providing visibility into cloud usage (non-inline). Inline interception is specifically used for real-time enforcement of policies, where actions such as blocking or scanning can be applied directly as data flows into or out of cloud services.

Let's break down the options:

Option A: Blocking file uploads to a personal Box account

Correct. This is a typical inline interception use case for a CASB. The CASB can intercept the upload process to a cloud storage service, like Box, and block files from being uploaded to personal accounts (which may be unauthorized). This action happens in real-time as the user tries to upload the file. This is a restrictive policy enforcement action that can be applied inline by the CASB.

Option B: Running a retroactive scan for data at rest in Google Drive

Incorrect. This action is a non-inline use case because it refers to a retroactive scan of data that is already stored in Google Drive (data at rest). Retroactive scanning typically happens after the data is already in the cloud, and it doesn’t block or intercept live traffic. Instead, it reviews and inspects stored data for compliance and security purposes, which doesn’t require inline intervention.

Option C: Using the Netskope steering client to provide user alerts when sensitive information is posted in Slack

Incorrect. While Netskope steering client can provide visibility and alerts for user activities in applications like Slack, this is more about monitoring and alerting rather than inline interception of transactions. The steering client directs traffic but doesn’t necessarily block actions inline. Alerts can be generated for user actions like posting sensitive information, but it’s not considered an inline interception use case because no blocking or live enforcement is taking place.

Option D: Scanning Dropbox for credit card information

Correct. Scanning for sensitive information, such as credit card numbers, is a common inline interception use case. The CASB can inspect file uploads to Dropbox in real-time and block the action if it detects sensitive data. This is an example of data loss prevention (DLP) in action, where the CASB intercepts the data before it’s uploaded, ensuring that it doesn't violate security or compliance policies. The scan and enforcement occur inline as the file is being transferred.

Inline interception is typically used for real-time blocking, scanning, or policy enforcement during data transfers or transactions in cloud services. Therefore, blocking file uploads to personal cloud accounts and scanning for sensitive information like credit card data are both classic use cases for inline CASB solutions.

Question 6

A customer changes CCI scoring from the default objective score to another score. In this scenario, what would be a valid reason for making this change?

A. The customer has discovered a new SaaS application that is not yet rated in the CCI database.
B. The customer's organization places a higher business risk weight on vendors that claim ownership of their data.
C. The customer wants to punish an application vendor for providing poor customer service.
D. The customer’s organization uses a SaaS application that is currently listed as “under research”.

Correct Answer: B

Explanation:

The CCI (Cloud Confidence Index) scoring is a tool used by organizations to evaluate the security, privacy, and compliance posture of cloud applications and services. The default objective score is a broad evaluation, but organizations might modify or customize it based on their own risk preferences or business considerations.

Let’s break down each option:

Option A: The customer has discovered a new SaaS application that is not yet rated in the CCI database.

Incorrect. If a new SaaS application is not rated yet, the customer could expect that it won’t have any score in the database, which would lead to a rating of "unrated" rather than a change to the default score. Changing the CCI score for such an application would not be a valid reason to modify it unless the application was later rated.

Option B: The customer's organization places a higher business risk weight on vendors that claim ownership of their data.

Correct. Organizations often adjust the CCI scoring based on their specific business risk criteria. If the customer places a higher risk on vendors claiming ownership of data, they could modify the default objective score to reflect that risk. This would be a valid reason to adjust the CCI score, as the organization is aligning the scoring with its business priorities and security concerns related to data ownership.

Option C: The customer wants to punish an application vendor for providing poor customer service.

Incorrect. The CCI scoring should be based on objective security, privacy, and compliance factors, not subjective reasons like poor customer service. Using CCI to “punish” a vendor would not be a valid reason for changing the scoring, as it doesn’t align with the intended purpose of the CCI, which is to assess risk from a technical and compliance perspective.

Option D: The customer’s organization uses a SaaS application that is currently listed as “under research”.

Incorrect. When an application is listed as “under research”, it means that the application's security, privacy, and compliance data are still being evaluated. In this case, the score would not be objective yet. Adjusting the CCI score because an app is still under research doesn’t align with the typical reason for adjusting the score—because the score would not be fully developed or available at that stage.

The most valid reason for modifying the CCI score would be related to the organization’s internal risk weighting and priorities, such as placing a higher risk weight on vendors who claim ownership of their data. This ensures that the security posture and data ownership concerns are reflected accurately in the CCI scoring, in line with the organization's risk management strategy.

Question 7

You need to create a service request ticket for a client-related issue using the Netskope client UI. In this scenario, you generate the client logs by right-clicking on the system tray icon and choosing __________.

A. Save logs
B. Configuration
C. Troubleshoot
D. Help

Correct Answer: A

Explanation:

To create a service request ticket for a client-related issue in Netskope, you need to generate client logs. The Netskope client UI provides a simple way to collect these logs, which can be sent to the support team to diagnose and resolve issues.

Here’s how the options work in the context of generating client logs:

Option A: Save logs

Correct. Right-clicking on the Netskope client system tray icon and choosing "Save logs" is the correct action to generate the client logs. These logs contain detailed information about the client’s activity and configuration, which is crucial when creating a service request ticket. The logs can be submitted to Netskope support to assist with troubleshooting the issue.

Option B: Configuration

Incorrect. The "Configuration" option would allow you to change settings or view configurations, but it is not intended for generating logs or creating service requests.

Option C: Troubleshoot

Incorrect. While the "Troubleshoot" option may offer tools for diagnosing issues, it doesn’t specifically generate the logs needed for a service request ticket. It could help in some troubleshooting scenarios but not for logging generation.

Option D: Help

Incorrect. The "Help" option would provide assistance, possibly in the form of documentation or links to support resources, but it does not directly generate logs for service requests.

To create a service request ticket and provide the necessary logs to Netskope support, you would save the logs using the "Save logs" option from the client UI's system tray icon.

Question 8

You need to block all users from uploading data files into risky collaboration applications. Which element must you configure within Netskope's CASB to accomplish this task?

A. DLP Rule
B. real-time policy
C. DLP Profile
D. block notification

Correct Answer: B

Explanation:

To block all users from uploading data files into risky collaboration applications within Netskope's CASB (Cloud Access Security Broker), you need to configure a real-time policy. Here's how the options relate to this task:

Option A: DLP Rule

Incorrect. DLP (Data Loss Prevention) rules are designed to protect sensitive data from being leaked or exposed in unauthorized ways. While DLP rules can be used to prevent data from being uploaded, they are more focused on identifying and protecting specific types of sensitive data, not just blocking uploads to certain applications. DLP rules work within a broader real-time policy to enforce specific actions on sensitive data.

Option B: Real-time policy

Correct. A real-time policy in Netskope CASB is specifically designed to monitor and control cloud application traffic in real time. It can be configured to block uploads, downloads, or other activities based on specific conditions, such as file type, application, user, or network. In this scenario, you can configure a real-time policy to block uploads in risky collaboration applications, directly addressing the requirement to block user uploads.

Option C: DLP Profile

Incorrect. A DLP profile is used to define what data is considered sensitive and how it should be handled in DLP rules. It does not directly block actions like file uploads to specific applications. The real-time policy would use the DLP rules to apply actions on sensitive data, but the real-time policy itself is what blocks specific behaviors such as file uploads.

Option D: Block notification

Incorrect. Block notifications inform users when their actions (like uploading a file) are blocked by a policy, but this is a result of a policy being applied rather than the configuration element needed to block the upload. The block notification does not itself block uploads; it’s used to notify users when they are blocked.

To effectively block uploads into risky collaboration applications, the most appropriate configuration is a real-time policy. This policy enables you to enforce actions like blocking uploads based on real-time data from the cloud environment.

Question 9

What are two reasons why legacy solutions, such as on-premises firewalls and proxies, fail to secure the data and data access compared to Netskope Secure Web Gateway? (Choose two.)

A. Legacy solutions are unable to see the user who is trying to access the application.
B. The applications where the data resides are no longer in one central location.
C. Legacy solutions do not meet compliance standards.
D. The users accessing this data are not in one central place.

Correct Answer: B, D

Explanation:

When comparing legacy solutions like on-premises firewalls and proxies with a modern cloud-native solution like Netskope Secure Web Gateway, several limitations of legacy systems become apparent. Netskope's cloud-based approach is designed to provide visibility and control over data access in today’s distributed, cloud-first environments. Let's examine the reasons:

Option A: Legacy solutions are unable to see the user who is trying to access the application.

Incorrect. This is generally not true for most legacy solutions. On-premises firewalls and proxies can indeed see and identify the user, as they can enforce security policies based on IP addresses or authenticated users. However, the problem lies in visibility and control across modern cloud environments, which are distributed across different locations and are difficult for traditional solutions to monitor effectively.

Option B: The applications where the data resides are no longer in one central location.

Correct. This is one of the key challenges for legacy solutions. In a modern cloud-first environment, data is often stored in various cloud applications and services such as SaaS platforms (e.g., Google Drive, Box, Office 365). Traditional on-premises firewalls and proxies are designed to secure data on internal servers, and they struggle to provide the same level of visibility and control when data is spread across multiple cloud environments. Netskope Secure Web Gateway solves this problem by offering deep visibility into cloud applications and securing data, regardless of where it resides.

Option C: Legacy solutions do not meet compliance standards.

Incorrect. While it’s possible that legacy solutions may struggle to meet specific compliance standards for newer cloud services, they can still meet various compliance requirements (e.g., PCI DSS, HIPAA) when deployed correctly in traditional environments. The problem isn’t that they cannot meet compliance, but rather that they aren't designed to provide granular visibility and enforcement over cloud-native and SaaS environments.

Option D: The users accessing this data are not in one central place.

Correct. With the increasing use of remote workforces, mobile devices, and cloud-hosted services, users are no longer in one central location. Traditional solutions like firewalls and proxies are typically designed to secure access from a centralized network, such as an office or a data center. However, they struggle to secure distributed, mobile users who may access cloud applications from anywhere in the world. Netskope Secure Web Gateway addresses this challenge by providing consistent security across any user, anywhere, and on any device.

The limitations of legacy solutions, like on-premises firewalls and proxies, are especially apparent in today’s world where data and users are decentralized. Modern solutions like Netskope Secure Web Gateway are specifically designed to meet the security needs of distributed data and users in the cloud. Legacy systems struggle with data residing in multiple cloud applications and distributed users, which are effectively addressed by Netskope.

Question 10

When would an administrator need to use a tombstone file?

A. You use a tombstone file when a policy causes a file download to be blocked.
B. You use a tombstone file when a policy causes a publicly shared file to be encrypted.
C. You use a tombstone file when the policy causes a file to be moved to quarantine.
D. You use a tombstone file when a policy causes a file to be moved to legal hold.

Correct Answer: C

Explanation:

A tombstone file is used as part of a file management and security process in cloud applications or systems when a file undergoes specific actions that require tracking or temporary storage. Let's break down each option:

Option A: You use a tombstone file when a policy causes a file download to be blocked.

Incorrect. Blocking a file download typically doesn't involve the use of a tombstone file. Blocking downloads prevents the file from being accessed or transferred, but there is no need for a tombstone file because no changes are made to the file itself—only access is restricted.

Option B: You use a tombstone file when a policy causes a publicly shared file to be encrypted.

Incorrect. Encrypting a file does not usually involve the use of a tombstone file. Encryption protects the contents of the file, but it does not require creating a tombstone file. The tombstone file is used for tracking the status of files in scenarios like quarantine or deletion, not for actions like encryption.

Option C: You use a tombstone file when the policy causes a file to be moved to quarantine.

Correct. A tombstone file is typically created when a file is moved to quarantine. In security scenarios, when a file is suspected of being malicious or violating policies, it is moved to quarantine to prevent further access. The tombstone file acts as a marker, indicating that the file has been quarantined and potentially keeping track of its status. The tombstone file helps administrators manage and restore the file if necessary.

Option D: You use a tombstone file when a policy causes a file to be moved to legal hold.

Incorrect. While files on legal hold are preserved and protected for legal reasons, a tombstone file is not typically used in this scenario. Legal hold involves tracking the file for compliance, and specific legal hold processes are in place to preserve data. The tombstone file is more commonly used in cases where files are quarantined, deleted, or undergoing temporary protection.

A tombstone file is used when a policy causes a file to be quarantined. It serves as a marker to track the file's status, ensuring administrators can manage or restore it as necessary. It helps maintain security controls and visibility over files that are flagged for potential risks or policy violations.