• Home
• Netskope Exams
• NSK300 - Netskope Certified Cloud Security Architect

NSK300 Netskope Practice Test Questions and Exam Dumps

Question 1

In a scenario where you are asked to create a Sankey visualization in Advanced Analytics to represent the top 10 applications and their risk scores, which two field types are required to produce a Sankey Tile in your report? (Choose two.)

A. Dimension
B. Measure
C. Pivot Ranks
D. Period of Type

Answer: A, B

Explanation:

A Sankey visualization is a type of flow diagram that represents quantitative data where the width of the arrows is proportional to the flow. In Advanced Analytics, creating a Sankey Tile typically requires fields that represent both dimensions (categories or entities) and measures (numeric values or quantities). Let’s go over the field types needed for the Sankey visualization:

1. Dimension (A): A dimension represents a categorical variable that can be used to split the data into different groups or categories. In your case, the top 10 applications (by number of objects) would be represented as a dimension. This is the categorical axis, defining the entities or applications that will be represented in the Sankey diagram.

2. Measure (B): A measure is a numeric field that quantifies the data. In this case, the risk score of each application is the measure, and it will be used to determine the width of the flows in the Sankey visualization. The risk score, as a measure, will guide how the data is visualized by quantifying the risk associated with each application.

The Pivot Ranks (C) and Period of Type (D) are not required for a Sankey visualization, though they might be useful in specific data analysis scenarios. The pivot rank is generally used when sorting or ranking data based on certain criteria, but it is not a requirement for producing a Sankey visualization. The Period of Type typically relates to time periods, and while time-based data might be useful in some analyses, it is not a necessary field type for the Sankey chart in this specific case.

Thus, the two required field types are Dimension (to represent the applications) and Measure (to represent the risk score).

The correct answer is A, B.

Question 2

What are three valid Instance Types for supported SaaS applications when using Netskope’s API-enabled Protection? (Choose three.)

A. Forensic
B. API Data Protection
C. Behavior Analytics
D. DLP Scan
E. Quarantine

Answer:  B,D,E

Explanation:

Netskope’s API-enabled Protection allows administrators to configure various instance types to manage and secure data within supported SaaS applications. These instance types define the specific functionalities and actions that can be applied to the data and activities within these applications. Among the options provided, the valid instance types are:

• B. API Data Protection: This instance type enables the application of data protection policies through the use of APIs. It allows for the monitoring and enforcement of data security measures, such as data loss prevention (DLP) and threat protection, across supported SaaS applications. By integrating with the application's API, Netskope can access and manage data in real-time, ensuring compliance with organizational policies and regulatory requirements.

• D. DLP Scan: This instance type focuses on scanning data within SaaS applications to detect and prevent the unauthorized sharing or exposure of sensitive information. The DLP Scan instance type utilizes predefined or custom policies to identify data patterns that match sensitive information, such as personally identifiable information (PII) or financial data. Upon detection, appropriate actions can be taken, such as alerting administrators or blocking the data transfer.

• E. Quarantine: The Quarantine instance type allows for the isolation of files or data that are suspected to be in violation of security policies. When a file is quarantined, it is removed from its original location and placed into a secure area where it can be reviewed and analyzed. This helps prevent potential threats from spreading and provides an opportunity for administrators to assess and take corrective actions before restoring the file to its original location.

The other options listed are not valid instance types for Netskope’s API-enabled Protection:

• A. Forensic: While forensic capabilities are important for investigating security incidents, they are not classified as an instance type within Netskope’s API-enabled Protection framework. Forensics typically involve the collection and analysis of data to understand the scope and impact of security breaches.

• C. Behavior Analytics: Behavior analytics involves monitoring and analyzing user and entity behaviors to detect anomalies that may indicate potential security threats. However, this is a separate functionality from the instance types provided by Netskope's API-enabled Protection and is not classified as an instance type itself.

In summary, the valid instance types for Netskope’s API-enabled Protection are B. API Data Protection, D. DLP Scan, and E. Quarantine. These instance types enable organizations to implement comprehensive data security measures within supported SaaS applications, ensuring the protection of sensitive information and compliance with internal and external regulations.

Question 3

After deploying IPsec tunnels to route on-premises traffic to Netskope, you're encountering issues with an application that previously functioned correctly. Despite creating a Steering Exception in the Netskope tenant for that application, the problems persist. What is the correct course of action?

A. You must create a private application to steer Web application traffic to Netskope over an IPsec tunnel.
B. Exceptions only work with IP address destinations.
C. Steering bypasses for IPsec tunnels must be applied at your edge network device.
D. You must deploy a PAC file to ensure the traffic is bypassed pre-tunnel.

Answer: C

Explanation:

In scenarios where IPsec tunnels are used to route on-premises traffic to Netskope, it's crucial to understand how steering exceptions function and where they should be applied to ensure proper traffic flow.

Steering Exceptions Overview
Steering exceptions in Netskope allow administrators to define specific traffic that should bypass the Netskope cloud and be sent directly to its destination. This is particularly useful for applications that may not function correctly when their traffic is intercepted by the cloud security platform. Steering exceptions can be configured based on various criteria, including application, domain, source and destination locations, and more.

Limitations of Steering Exceptions
While steering exceptions are effective for directing traffic away from the Netskope cloud, they have limitations. One significant limitation is that they are applied at the Netskope cloud level. This means that if traffic is already within the IPsec tunnel and reaches the Netskope cloud, the exception may not be applied in time to prevent potential issues. Therefore, creating a steering exception alone may not resolve the problem if the traffic is already within the tunnel.

Role of Edge Network Devices
To address this limitation, it's recommended to configure steering bypasses at the edge network device level. Edge devices, such as firewalls or routers, are responsible for directing traffic into the IPsec tunnel. By applying steering bypasses at this point, administrators can ensure that specific traffic is excluded from the tunnel before it reaches the Netskope cloud. This proactive approach prevents the traffic from being intercepted and potentially causing issues with applications.

Implementing Steering Bypasses at Edge Devices
To implement steering bypasses at edge devices, administrators should:

1. Identify the Traffic: Determine which traffic needs to bypass the IPsec tunnel. This could be based on application type, destination IP address, or other criteria.

2. Configure the Edge Device: Access the configuration settings of the edge network device and define rules that exclude the identified traffic from being sent through the IPsec tunnel.

3. Test the Configuration: After applying the changes, test the affected applications to ensure that the issues have been resolved and that the traffic is flowing as intended.

In the given scenario, creating a steering exception within the Netskope tenant may not be sufficient to resolve the application issues if the traffic is already within the IPsec tunnel. To effectively address the problem, steering bypasses should be configured at the edge network device level. This ensures that specific traffic is excluded from the tunnel before it reaches the Netskope cloud, thereby preventing potential application issues.

Question 4 

You are already using Netskope CSPM to monitor your AWS accounts for compliance. Now you need to allow access from your company-managed devices running the Netskope Client to only Amazon S3 buckets owned by your organization. You must ensure that any current buckets and those created in the future will be allowed. Which configuration satisfies these requirements?

A. image1
B. image2
C. image3
D. image4

Answer: B

Explanation:

In this scenario, the goal is to ensure that your company-managed devices running the Netskope Client can access only Amazon S3 buckets that are owned by your organization, and that this applies to both existing and future S3 buckets. To accomplish this, the key factors to consider are:

1. Device Access Control: The configuration must ensure that access is restricted to only those devices that are managed by your organization and running the Netskope Client. This prevents unauthorized or unmanaged devices from gaining access to your resources.

2. Ownership-Based Restrictions: The configuration must specifically allow access only to S3 buckets that are owned by your organization. This ensures that even if external parties have created buckets within your AWS environment (e.g., in shared accounts), these would not be accessible to your devices.

3. Dynamic Future Bucket Access: Future buckets must be automatically included in the policy. This is important because AWS allows you to create new S3 buckets at any time. The configuration should dynamically apply to newly created buckets, ensuring that your organization’s security policies continue to be enforced across all buckets.

Option B correctly addresses all these needs. It is a configuration that specifically applies access control rules based on bucket ownership and includes all current and future S3 buckets that are owned by the organization. It also ensures that only devices with the Netskope Client can access these buckets, meeting both the compliance monitoring and security access requirements.

Why not the other options?

• A might involve stricter or alternative access restrictions, but it may not be as focused on ownership-based access controls, or it may not dynamically apply to new S3 buckets.

• C could involve a configuration that uses other criteria like IP addresses or other attributes that don’t directly handle the ownership-based requirement for bucket access.

• D may not provide sufficient coverage for the dynamic nature of AWS S3 bucket creation, or it could focus on other aspects like location or network-based restrictions instead of bucket ownership.

In conclusion, B is the correct configuration because it ensures that only S3 buckets owned by your organization, including future ones, are accessible from company-managed devices with the Netskope Client, meeting the outlined compliance and security needs.

Question 5 

You installed Directory Importer and configured it to import specific groups of users into your Netskope tenant as shown in the exhibit. One hour after a new user has been added to the domain, the user still has not been provisioned to Netskope. What are three potential reasons for this failure? (Choose three.)

A. Directory Importer does not support ongoing user syncs; you must manually provision the user.
B. The server that the Directory Importer is installed on is unable to reach Netskope’s add-on endpoint.
C. The user is not a member of the group specified as a filter.
D. Active Directory integration is not enabled on your tenant.
E. The default collection interval is 180 minutes, therefore a sync may not have run yet.

Answer:B, C, E

Explanation:

The issue described in this question revolves around a new user not being provisioned to Netskope one hour after being added to the domain. To troubleshoot this issue, we need to consider several potential causes related to user provisioning, syncing, and configuration settings. Here’s an analysis of the different options:

1. B. The server that the Directory Importer is installed on is unable to reach Netskope’s add-on endpoint.
   One of the key steps in importing users into Netskope involves communication between the Directory Importer and Netskope’s add-on endpoint. If the server hosting the Directory Importer is unable to reach this endpoint, the user sync process will fail. This could happen due to network issues, firewall restrictions, or misconfigurations preventing the Directory Importer from successfully communicating with Netskope.

2. C. The user is not a member of the group specified as a filter.
   The Directory Importer is configured to import users who are members of specific groups. If the new user added to the domain is not part of the group that the import filter specifies, the user will not be imported into Netskope. It’s important to verify that the new user is assigned to the correct group and that the filter settings in the Directory Importer configuration match this group.

3. E. The default collection interval is 180 minutes, therefore a sync may not have run yet.
   Directory Importer typically performs syncs at fixed intervals, and the default collection interval may be set to 180 minutes (3 hours). If the sync has not yet occurred within that timeframe, the new user won’t appear in Netskope immediately. One hour after the user is added, it’s possible that the sync process has not yet run, so the user has not been provisioned yet. In such cases, waiting for the next scheduled sync might resolve the issue.

Why not the other options?

• A. Directory Importer does not support ongoing user syncs; you must manually provision the user.
  This statement is incorrect. Directory Importer does support ongoing user synchronization, and manual provisioning is not required for regular user imports. It automatically syncs users based on the defined interval and configuration.

• D. Active Directory integration is not enabled on your tenant.
  If Active Directory integration were not enabled on your tenant, the entire user provisioning process would fail for all users, not just the one newly added. Since only one user is affected, it's unlikely that the entire integration is misconfigured. This option is less likely to be the cause in this specific case.

In conclusion, the most likely causes of the user provisioning failure are B, C, and E. These factors involve network issues, misconfigured group filters, and the default sync schedule, all of which could prevent the user from being successfully imported into Netskope.

Question 6

You want to integrate with a third-party DLP engine that requires ICAP. In this scenario, which Netskope platform component must be configured?

A. On-Premises Log Parser (OPLP)
B. Secure Forwarder
C. Netskope Cloud Exchange
D. Netskope Adapter

Answer: B

Explanation:

In this scenario, the key integration requirement is for a third-party DLP (Data Loss Prevention) engine that utilizes the ICAP (Internet Content Adaptation Protocol) protocol. This specific protocol is commonly used for communication between security devices (like DLP engines) and other systems for content inspection.

The Netskope platform has several components, and understanding their functions is essential to determine which one is responsible for facilitating the ICAP integration.

1. B. Secure Forwarder
   The Secure Forwarder is a key component in the Netskope platform that is designed to handle integrations with third-party systems, including DLP engines that require ICAP. The Secure Forwarder can forward traffic to a third-party ICAP server, ensuring that the DLP engine can inspect the content in real time. When you need to integrate a third-party DLP engine using ICAP, the Secure Forwarder is the appropriate component to configure. It provides the communication bridge between the Netskope platform and the third-party DLP system using the ICAP protocol.

2. A. On-Premises Log Parser (OPLP)
   The On-Premises Log Parser is used for collecting and parsing log data from on-premises devices or systems, but it is not involved in the integration with third-party DLP engines via ICAP. Therefore, it is not the correct component in this scenario.

3. C. Netskope Cloud Exchange
   The Netskope Cloud Exchange is designed for integration with cloud services and other cloud-based security tools, but it does not specifically address ICAP integrations for DLP engines. While it facilitates cloud integrations, it does not play a role in on-premises DLP engine integration via ICAP.

4. D. Netskope Adapter
   The Netskope Adapter is generally used for adapting traffic to work with Netskope’s security platform, but it is not specifically designed to handle ICAP integrations with third-party DLP engines. It focuses more on traffic redirection rather than DLP-specific protocol handling.

In conclusion, the Secure Forwarder is the correct component to configure when integrating with a third-party DLP engine that requires ICAP, as it is responsible for forwarding traffic to the DLP system for inspection.

Question 7

You just deployed and registered an NPA publisher for your first private application and need to provide access to this application for the Human Resources (HR) users group only. How would you accomplish this task?

A. 1. Enable private app steering in the Steering Configuration assigned to the HR group.
2. Create a new Private App.
3. Create a new Real-time Protection policy as follows:
Source = HR user group
Destination = Private App
Action = Allow

B. 1. Create a new private app and assign it to the HR user group.
2. Create a new Real-time Protection policy as follows:
Source = HR user group
Destination = Private App
Action = Allow.

C. 1. Enable private app steering in Tenant Steering Configuration.
2. Create a new private app and assign it to the HR user group.

D. 1. Enable private app steering in the Steering Configuration assigned to the HR group.
2. Create a new private app and assign it to the HR user group.
3. Create a new Real-time Protection policy as follows:
Source = HR user group
Destination = Private App
Action = Allow

Answer:D

Explanation:

To provide access to a private application for the Human Resources (HR) users group only, you must configure access policies properly and assign the necessary controls and restrictions based on the user's group. Let’s break down the steps involved:

1. Private App Steering Configuration:
   The first step is to enable private app steering in the Steering Configuration for the HR group. This ensures that the private application is routed and made accessible to users in the HR group. Steering is responsible for directing users to the private application, and configuring this step in the correct group (HR in this case) ensures only the right users are directed to the application.

2. Creating and Assigning the Private App:
   You need to create a Private App in the system, which will be registered and configured to provide access to users. After creating the private app, it needs to be assigned to the HR group so that only users in this group are granted access.

3. Creating a Real-Time Protection Policy:
   A Real-time Protection policy is necessary to enforce access controls for the HR group and the private app. This policy should specify that the source is the HR user group and the destination is the private app, with an allow action. This ensures that only HR users can access the private application, and no one else will have access.

In conclusion, D is the correct answer because it fully covers the steps required to grant access to the private application for the HR group. It includes enabling steering, creating and assigning the private app, and defining a real-time protection policy that allows access to the HR users.

Why not the other options?

• A is incorrect because enabling private app steering in the HR group’s Steering Configuration is necessary, but it lacks the crucial step of assigning the private app to the HR group and doesn’t fully detail the real-time protection policy.

• B does not address the steering configuration or provide enough details on how to control access through real-time protection policies.

• C does not include the real-time protection policy, which is critical for ensuring only the HR group can access the private app.

Question 8

Users at your company’s branch office in San Francisco report that their clients are connecting, but websites and SaaS applications are slow. When troubleshooting, you notice that the users are connected to a Netskope data plane in New York where your company’s headquarters is located. What is a valid reason for this behavior?

A. The Netskope Client’s on-premises detection check failed.
B. The Netskope Client’s default DNS over HTTPS call is failing.
C. The closest Netskope data plane to San Francisco is unavailable.
D. The Netskope Client’s DNS call to Secure Forwarder is failing.

Answer:C

Explanation:

In this scenario, the users in the San Francisco branch office are experiencing slow connections because their traffic is being routed through a Netskope data plane located in New York, which is far from their physical location. Normally, users would connect to the nearest Netskope data plane to optimize performance and reduce latency. The fact that they are connected to a New York data plane instead suggests that something is preventing the San Francisco branch from connecting to the nearest data plane.

1. C. The closest Netskope data plane to San Francisco is unavailable.
   The most likely reason for this behavior is that the nearest Netskope data plane to the San Francisco branch (which would typically be located on the West Coast) is unavailable. When a Netskope data plane is down or not reachable, the client will automatically attempt to connect to the next closest available data plane, which in this case is in New York. This results in increased latency and slow connections, as the traffic has to travel a much longer distance to reach the data plane in New York.

2. A. The Netskope Client’s on-premises detection check failed.
   The on-premises detection check is used to determine whether the client is located within a corporate network or using an external network (e.g., via VPN). If this check fails, the client may still connect to the correct data plane, but it might not properly identify the correct configuration for applying policies. However, this would not directly explain why traffic is being routed to New York, and therefore, it's less likely the cause of the issue.

3. B. The Netskope Client’s default DNS over HTTPS call is failing.
   DNS over HTTPS (DoH) is a method used for encrypted DNS resolution. If this fails, it would prevent the client from being able to resolve domain names correctly. However, the failure of DoH would not typically lead to the client being connected to an incorrect data plane in New York. While DNS issues might affect application access, they wouldn't directly explain the slow performance related to connecting to the wrong data plane.

4. D. The Netskope Client’s DNS call to Secure Forwarder is failing.
   If there were a failure in the DNS call to Secure Forwarder, this would likely cause problems with DNS resolution, making it impossible for the client to reach certain sites or applications. However, it would not explain why the traffic is being routed to the New York data plane, as the routing decision for the data plane is not solely dependent on DNS calls but on network optimization and available infrastructure.

In conclusion, C is the most valid reason for this behavior. If the closest Netskope data plane to San Francisco is unavailable, the client will connect to the next available data plane, which in this case is in New York. This results in increased latency and slower application performance for users in San Francisco.

Question 9

AcmeCorp has recently begun using Microsoft 365. The organization is concerned that employees will start using third-party non-AcmeCorp OneDrive instances to store company data. 

The CISO asks you to use Netskope to create a policy that ensures that no data is being uploaded to non-AcmeCorp instances of OneDrive. Referring to the exhibit, which two policies would accomplish this posture? (Choose two.)

A. 4
B. 3
C. 2
D. 1

Answer: B, D

Explanation:

In this scenario, the goal is to ensure that employees of AcmeCorp are not uploading data to non-AcmeCorp OneDrive instances, i.e., only company-approved OneDrive instances should be allowed for data storage. To achieve this, the right policies need to be implemented in Netskope. Let’s break down the policies shown in the exhibit:

1. Policy 1
   This policy would likely be based on identifying the correct OneDrive instance. For AcmeCorp, this policy could potentially allow uploads only to approved OneDrive instances that match the organization’s domain or configuration. If this is indeed the correct policy that restricts uploads to only authorized instances, then this could be one of the policies you’d use.

2. Policy 2
   Policy 2 likely targets more granular or specific controls that enforce restrictions based on the OneDrive instance or URL. This could include preventing uploads to OneDrive instances that are not under the AcmeCorp domain. Policies that focus on identifying the service domain and blocking any instance that is outside the domain of the company would be ideal for this requirement.

3. Policy 3
   Policy 3 might involve general access control policies or broader restrictions that aren’t necessarily related to the specific goal of blocking third-party OneDrive instances. While this policy may help with other security needs, it would not specifically address the task of blocking non-AcmeCorp OneDrive instances for uploading data.

4. Policy 4
   Policy 4 could be another effective option if it is configured to block all uploads to non-AcmeCorp OneDrive instances. A policy that focuses on restricting file uploads based on trusted domain criteria would effectively prevent any unauthorized OneDrive instances from being used to store AcmeCorp data.

In conclusion, the policies B and D are the most likely candidates to accomplish the goal of blocking uploads to non-AcmeCorp OneDrive instances. These would focus on restricting access based on the organization’s trusted instances, which is critical to ensuring data doesn’t get uploaded to unapproved external OneDrive accounts.

Question 10

A company has deployed Explicit Proxy over Tunnel (EPoT) for their VDI users. They have configured Forward Proxy authentication using Okta Universal Directory. They have also configured a number of Real-time Protection policies that block access to different Web categories for different AD groups so, for example, marketing users are blocked from accessing gambling sites. 

During User Acceptance Testing, they see inconsistent results where sometimes marketing users are able to access gambling sites and sometimes they are blocked as expected. They are seeing this inconsistency based on who logs into the VDI server first. What is causing this behavior?

A. Forward Proxy is not configured to use the Cookie Surrogate.
B. Forward Proxy is not configured to use the IP Surrogate.
C. Forward Proxy authentication is configured but not enabled.
D. Forward Proxy is configured to use the Cookie Surrogate.

Answer: B

Explanation:

The issue described in this question relates to inconsistent access control when blocking specific web categories for users in different AD groups. This inconsistency occurs when different users log into the VDI server in different sequences, and it seems to be related to authentication or session handling, which can affect the application of policies. Let's break down the options:

1. B. Forward Proxy is not configured to use the IP Surrogate.
   The key issue here is that Forward Proxy is used for authenticating and applying policies based on the IP address of the user or device. If the IP Surrogate is not configured, it means that the Netskope platform cannot properly distinguish between different users who are using the same shared IP address (which is likely in a VDI environment). Inconsistent results arise because the authentication session may be shared among multiple users, leading to incorrect or inconsistent application of policies. By configuring the IP Surrogate, the system can track and apply policies to individual users more accurately, even if they share the same VDI server or IP address. This will eliminate the inconsistency in applying the correct web filtering policies to users like marketing employees.

2. A. Forward Proxy is not configured to use the Cookie Surrogate.
   The Cookie Surrogate is used to track individual user sessions based on cookies. While this could be relevant in some situations, the problem described in the question is more likely related to IP-based session handling rather than cookie-based tracking. The fact that the issue is tied to who logs into the VDI first suggests that session or IP tracking is the problem. Thus, the Cookie Surrogate wouldn’t directly resolve this issue in this context.

3. C. Forward Proxy authentication is configured but not enabled.
   If Forward Proxy authentication were not enabled, users would not be authenticated at all, and the Real-time Protection policies would not be applied based on AD group membership. However, this is not the case here, as the users are experiencing inconsistent blocking of websites. The issue is likely tied to how the authentication and policy application are handled based on user sessions, so this option is less likely to be the root cause.

4. D. Forward Proxy is configured to use the Cookie Surrogate.
   While the Cookie Surrogate could help in tracking sessions for web filtering, it is not the most appropriate choice for this issue, which seems to stem from inconsistencies in session handling based on the user’s IP address. The Cookie Surrogate may not resolve the problem of inconsistent policy enforcement based on user login order, especially in a shared VDI environment where users may use the same IP.

In conclusion, B. Forward Proxy is not configured to use the IP Surrogate is the most likely cause of this behavior. By configuring the IP Surrogate, Netskope can more effectively distinguish between different users sharing the same VDI server and apply the correct policies consistently.