Palo Alto Networks PSE-Strata-Pro-24 Practice Test - Questions Answers, Page 2

In this scenario, the company does not use on-premises Active Directory and manages devices with Entra ID and Jamf, which implies a cloud-native and modern management setup. Below is the evaluation of each option:

Option A: Captive portal

Captive portal is typically used in environments where identity mapping is needed for unmanaged devices or guest users. It provides a mechanism for users to authenticate themselves through a web interface.

However, in this case, the company is managing devices using Entra ID and Jamf, which means identity information can already be centralized through other means. Captive portal is not an ideal solution here.

This option is not appropriate.

Option B: User-ID agents configured for WMI client probing

WMI (Windows Management Instrumentation) client probing is a mechanism used to map IP addresses to usernames in a Windows environment. This approach is specific to on-premises Active Directory deployments and requires direct communication with Windows endpoints.

Since the company does not have an on-premises AD and is using Entra ID and Jamf, this method is not applicable.

This option is not appropriate.

Option C: GlobalProtect with an internal gateway deployment

GlobalProtect is Palo Alto Networks' VPN solution, which allows for secure remote access. It also supports identity-based mapping when deployed with internal gateways.

In this case, GlobalProtect with an internal gateway can serve as a mechanism to provide user and device visibility based on the managed devices connecting through the gateway.

This option is appropriate.

Option D: Cloud Identity Engine synchronized with Entra ID

The Cloud Identity Engine provides a cloud-based approach to synchronize identity information from identity providers like Entra ID (formerly Azure AD).

In a cloud-native environment with Entra ID and Jamf, the Cloud Identity Engine is a natural fit as it integrates seamlessly to provide identity visibility for applications and data.

This option is appropriate.

Palo Alto Networks documentation on Cloud Identity Engine

GlobalProtect configuration and use cases in Palo Alto Knowledge Base

The customer is seeking centralized policy management to reduce human error while maintaining compliance with their contractual obligations to AWS and Azure. Here's the evaluation of each option:

Option A: Cloud NGFWs at both CSPs; provide the customer a license for a Panorama virtual appliance from their CSP's marketplace of choice to centrally manage the systems

Cloud NGFW is a fully managed Next-Generation Firewall service by Palo Alto Networks, offered in AWS and Azure marketplaces. It integrates natively with the CSP infrastructure, making it a good fit for customers with existing CSP agreements.

Panorama, Palo Alto Networks' centralized management solution, can be deployed as a virtual appliance in the CSP marketplace of choice, enabling centralized policy management across all NGFWs.

This option addresses the customer's need for centralized management while leveraging their existing contracts with AWS and Azure.

This option is appropriate.

Option B: Cloud NGFWs in AWS and VM-Series firewall in Azure; the customer selects a PAYG licensing Panorama deployment in their CSP of choice

This option suggests using Cloud NGFW in AWS but VM-Series firewalls in Azure. While VM-Series is a flexible virtual firewall solution, it may not align with the customer's stated preference for CSP-managed services like Cloud NGFW.

This option introduces a mix of solutions that could complicate centralized management and reduce operational efficiency.

This option is less appropriate.

Option C: VM-Series firewalls in both CSPs; manually built Panorama in the CSP of choice on a host of either type: Palo Alto Networks provides a license

VM-Series firewalls are well-suited for cloud deployments but require more manual configuration compared to Cloud NGFW.

Building a Panorama instance manually on a host increases operational overhead and does not leverage the customer's existing CSP marketplaces.

This option is less aligned with the customer's needs.

Option D: VM-Series firewall and CN-Series firewall in both CSPs; provide the customer a private-offer Panorama virtual appliance from their CSP's marketplace of choice to centrally manage the systems

This option introduces both VM-Series and CN-Series firewalls in both CSPs. While CN-Series firewalls are designed for Kubernetes environments, they may not be relevant if the customer does not specifically require container-level security.

Adding CN-Series firewalls may introduce unnecessary complexity and costs.

This option is not appropriate.

Palo Alto Networks documentation on Cloud NGFW

Panorama overview in Palo Alto Knowledge Base

VM-Series firewalls deployment guide in CSPs: Palo Alto Documentation

Advanced WildFire is Palo Alto Networks' cloud-based malware analysis and prevention solution. It determines whether files are malicious by executing them in a sandbox environment and observing their behavior. To address the customer's concern about the file categorization, the systems engineer must provide evidence of the file's behavior. Here's the analysis of each option:

Option A: Review the threat logs for information to provide to the customer

Threat logs can provide a summary of events and verdicts for malicious files, but they do not include the detailed behavior analysis needed to convince the customer.

While reviewing the logs is helpful as a preliminary step, it does not provide the level of proof the customer needs.

This option is not sufficient on its own.

Option B: Use the WildFire Analysis Report in the log to show the customer the malicious actions the file took when it was detonated

WildFire generates an analysis report that includes details about the file's behavior during detonation in the sandbox, such as network activity, file modifications, process executions, and any indicators of compromise (IoCs).

This report provides concrete evidence to demonstrate why the file was flagged as malicious. It is the most accurate way to assure the customer that WildFire's decision was based on observed malicious actions.

This is the best option.

Option C: Open a TAG ticket for the customer and allow support engineers to determine the appropriate action

While opening a support ticket is a valid action for further analysis or appeal, it is not a direct way to assure the customer of the current WildFire verdict.

This option does not directly address the customer's request for immediate proof.

This option is not ideal.

Option D: Do nothing because the customer will realize Advanced WildFire is right

This approach is dismissive of the customer's concerns and does not provide any evidence to support WildFire's decision.

This option is inappropriate.

Palo Alto Networks documentation on WildFire

WildFire Analysis Reports

When sizing a Palo Alto Networks NGFW appliance, it's crucial to consider variables that affect its performance and capacity. These include the network's traffic characteristics, application requirements, and expected workloads. Below is the analysis of each option:

Option A: Connections per second

Connections per second (CPS) is a critical metric for determining how many new sessions the firewall can handle per second. High CPS requirements are common in environments with high traffic turnover, such as web servers or applications with frequent session terminations and creations.

This is an important sizing variable.

Option B: Max sessions

Max sessions represent the total number of concurrent sessions the firewall can support. For environments with a large number of users or devices, this metric is critical to prevent session exhaustion.

This is an important sizing variable.

Option C: Packet replication

Packet replication is used in certain configurations, such as TAP mode or port mirroring for traffic inspection. While it impacts performance, it is not a primary variable for firewall sizing as it is a specific use case.

This is not a key variable for sizing.

Option D: App-ID firewall throughput

App-ID throughput measures the firewall's ability to inspect traffic and apply policies based on application signatures. It directly impacts the performance of traffic inspection under real-world conditions.

This is an important sizing variable.

Option E: Telemetry enabled

While telemetry provides data for monitoring and analysis, enabling it does not significantly impact the sizing of the firewall. It is not a core variable for determining firewall performance or capacity.

This is not a key variable for sizing.

Palo Alto Networks documentation on Firewall Sizing Guidelines

Knowledge Base article on Performance and Capacity Sizing

The default configuration of a Palo Alto Networks NGFW includes a set of default security rules that determine how traffic is handled when no explicit rules are defined. Here's the explanation for each option:

Option A: Security profiles are applied to all policies by default, eliminating implicit trust of any data traversing the firewall

Security profiles (such as Antivirus, Anti-Spyware, and URL Filtering) are not applied to any policies by default. Administrators must explicitly apply them to security rules.

This statement is incorrect.

Option B: The default policy action for intrazone traffic is deny, eliminating implicit trust within a security zone

By default, traffic within the same zone (intrazone traffic) is allowed. For example, traffic between devices in the 'trust' zone is permitted unless explicitly denied by an administrator.

This statement is incorrect.

Option C: The default policy action allows all traffic unless explicitly denied

Palo Alto Networks firewalls do not have an 'allow all' default rule. Instead, they include a default 'deny all' rule for interzone traffic and an implicit 'allow' rule for intrazone traffic.

This statement is incorrect.

Option D: The default policy action for interzone traffic is deny, eliminating implicit trust between security zones

By default, traffic between different zones (interzone traffic) is denied. This aligns with the principle of zero trust, ensuring that no traffic is implicitly allowed between zones. Administrators must define explicit rules to allow interzone traffic.

This statement is correct.

Palo Alto Networks documentation on Security Policy Defaults

Knowledge Base article on Default Security Rules

To configure GlobalProtect to authenticate users from multiple SAML identity providers (IdPs), the correct approach involves creating multiple authentication profiles, one for each IdP. Here's the analysis of each option:

Option A: GlobalProtect with multiple authentication profiles for each SAML IdP

GlobalProtect allows configuring multiple SAML authentication profiles, each corresponding to a specific IdP.

These profiles are associated with the GlobalProtect portal or gateway. When users attempt to authenticate, they can be directed to the appropriate IdP based on their domain or other attributes.

This is the correct approach to enable authentication for users from multiple IdPs.

Option B: Multiple authentication mode Cloud Identity Engine authentication profile for use on the GlobalProtect portals and gateways

The Cloud Identity Engine (CIE) can synchronize identities from multiple directories, but it does not directly support multiple SAML IdPs for a shared GlobalProtect setup.

This option is not applicable.

Option C: Authentication sequence that has multiple authentication profiles using different authentication methods

Authentication sequences allow multiple authentication methods (e.g., LDAP, RADIUS, SAML) to be tried in sequence for the same user, but they are not designed for handling multiple SAML IdPs.

This option is not appropriate for the scenario.

Option D: Multiple Cloud Identity Engine tenants for each business unit

Deploying multiple CIE tenants for each business unit adds unnecessary complexity and is not required for configuring GlobalProtect to authenticate users to multiple SAML IdPs.

This option is not appropriate.

Device-ID is a feature in Palo Alto Networks firewalls that identifies devices based on their unique attributes (e.g., MAC addresses, device type, operating system). Device-ID can be used in several policy types to provide granular control. Here's how it applies to each option:

Option A: Security

Device-ID can be used in Security policies to enforce rules based on the device type or identity. For example, you can create policies that allow or block traffic for specific device types (e.g., IoT devices).

This is correct.

Option B: Decryption

Device-ID cannot be used in decryption policies. Decryption policies are based on traffic types, certificates, and other SSL/TLS attributes, not device attributes.

This is incorrect.

Option C: Policy-based forwarding (PBF)

Device-ID can be used in PBF policies to control the forwarding of traffic based on the identified device. For example, you can route traffic from certain device types through specific ISPs or VPN tunnels.

This is correct.

Option D: SD-WAN

SD-WAN policies use metrics such as path quality (e.g., latency, jitter) and application information for traffic steering. Device-ID is not a criterion used in SD-WAN policies.

This is incorrect.

Option E: Quality of Service (QoS)

Device-ID can be used in QoS policies to apply traffic shaping or bandwidth control for specific devices. For example, you can prioritize or limit bandwidth for traffic originating from IoT devices or specific endpoints.

This is correct.

Palo Alto Networks documentation on Device-ID

User-ID is a feature in PAN-OS that maps IP addresses to usernames by integrating with various directory services (e.g., Active Directory). User-ID can be implemented through agents provided by Palo Alto Networks. Here's how each option applies:

Option A: Integrated agent

The integrated User-ID agent is built into PAN-OS and does not require an external agent installation. It is configured directly on the firewall and integrates with directory services to retrieve user information.

This is correct.

Option B: GlobalProtect agent

GlobalProtect is Palo Alto Networks' VPN solution and does not function as a User-ID agent. While it can be used to authenticate users and provide visibility, it is not categorized as a User-ID agent.

This is incorrect.

Option C: Windows-based agent

The Windows-based User-ID agent is a standalone agent installed on a Windows server. It collects user mapping information from directory services and sends it to the firewall.

This is correct.

Option D: Cloud Identity Engine (CIE)

The Cloud Identity Engine provides identity services in a cloud-native manner but is not a User-ID agent. It synchronizes with identity providers like Azure AD and Okta.

This is incorrect.

Palo Alto Networks documentation on User-ID

Knowledge Base article on User-ID Agent Options

To help a customer understand how Palo Alto Networks can bring value when adopting a Zero Trust architecture, the systems engineer must focus on understanding the customer's specific needs and explaining how the Zero Trust strategy aligns with their business goals. Here's the detailed analysis of each option:

Option A: Ask the customer about their internal business flows, such as how their users interact with applications and data across the infrastructure

Understanding the customer's internal workflows and how their users interact with applications and data is a critical first step in Zero Trust. This information allows the systems engineer to identify potential security gaps and suggest tailored solutions.

This is correct.

Option B: Explain how Palo Alto Networks can place virtual NGFWs across the customer's network to ensure assets and traffic are seen and controlled

While placing NGFWs across the customer's network may be part of the implementation, this approach focuses on the product rather than the customer's strategy. Zero Trust is more about policies and architecture than specific product placement.

This is incorrect.

Option C: Use the Zero Trust Roadshow package to demonstrate to the customer how robust Palo Alto Networks capabilities are in meeting Zero Trust

While demonstrating capabilities is valuable during the later stages of engagement, the initial focus should be on understanding the customer's business requirements rather than showcasing products.

This is incorrect.

Option D: Ask the customer about their approach to Zero Trust, explaining that it is a strategy more than it is something they purchase

Zero Trust is not a product but a strategy that requires a shift in mindset. By discussing their approach, the systems engineer can identify whether the customer understands Zero Trust principles and guide them accordingly.

This is correct.

Palo Alto Networks documentation on Zero Trust

Zero Trust Architecture Principles in NIST 800-207