With Strata Cloud Manager (SCM) or Panorama, customers can monitor and manage which three solutions? (Choose three.)
Prisma Access
Prisma Cloud
Cortex XSIAM
NGFW
Prisma SD-WAN
Prisma Access (Answer A):
Strata Cloud Manager (SCM) and Panorama provide centralized visibility and management forPrisma Access, Palo Alto Networks’ cloud-delivered security platform for remote users and branch offices.
NGFW (Answer D):
Both SCM and Panorama are used to manage and monitorPalo Alto Networks Next-Generation Firewalls(NGFWs) deployed in on-premise, hybrid, or multi-cloud environments.
Prisma SD-WAN (Answer E):
SCM and Panorama integrate withPrisma SD-WANto manage branch connectivity and security, ensuring seamless operation in an SD-WAN environment.
Why Not B:
Prisma Cloudis a distinct platform designed for cloud-native security and is not directly managed through Strata Cloud Manager or Panorama.
Why Not C:
Cortex XSIAM(Extended Security Intelligence and Automation Management) is part of the Cortex platform and is not managed by SCM or Panorama.
References from Palo Alto Networks Documentation:
Strata Cloud Manager Overview
Panorama Features and Benefits
The efforts of a systems engineer (SE) with an industrial mining company account have yielded interest in Palo Alto Networks as part of its effort to incorporate innovative design into operations using robots and remote-controlled vehicles in dangerous situations. A discovery call confirms that the company will receive control signals to its machines over a private mobile network using radio towers that connect to cloud-based applications that run the control programs.
Which two sets of solutions should the SE recommend?
That 5G Security be enabled and architected to ensure the cloud computing is not compromised in the commands it is sending to the onsite machines.
That Cloud NGFW be included to protect the cloud-based applications from external access into the cloud service provider hosting them.
That IoT Security be included for visibility into the machines and to ensure that other devices connected to the network are identified and given risk and behavior profiles.
That an Advanced CDSS bundle (Advanced Threat Prevention, Advanced WildFire, and Advanced URL Filtering) be procured to ensure the design receives advanced protection.
5G Security (Answer A):
In this scenario, the mining company operates on a private mobile network, likely powered by5G technologyto ensure low latency and high bandwidth for controlling robots and vehicles.
Palo Alto Networks5G Securityis specifically designed to protect private mobile networks. It prevents exploitation of vulnerabilities in the 5G infrastructure and ensures the control signals sent to the machines arenot compromisedby attackers.
Key features include network slicing protection, signaling plane security, and secure user plane communications.
IoT Security (Answer C):
The mining operation depends on machines and remote-controlled vehicles, which are IoT devices.
Palo Alto NetworksIoT Securityprovides:
Full device visibilityto detect all IoT devices (such as robots, remote vehicles, or sensors).
Behavioral analysisto create risk profiles and identify anomalies in themachines' operations.
This ensures a secure environment for IoT devices, reducing the risk of a device being exploited.
Why Not Cloud NGFW (Answer B):
WhileCloud NGFWis critical for protecting cloud-based applications, the specific concern here isprotecting control signals and IoT devicesrather than external access into the cloud service.
The private mobile network and IoT device protection requirements make5G SecurityandIoT Securitymore relevant.
Why Not Advanced CDSS Bundle (Answer D):
The Advanced CDSS bundle (Advanced Threat Prevention, Advanced WildFire, Advanced URL Filtering) is essential for securing web traffic and detecting threats, but it does not address thespecific challenges of securing private mobile networksandIoT devices.
While these services can supplement the design, they are not theprimary focusin this use case.
References from Palo Alto Networks Documentation:
5G Security for Private Mobile Networks
IoT Security Solution Brief
Cloud NGFW Overview
Which three tools can a prospective customer use to evaluate Palo Alto Networks products to assess where they will fit in the existing architecture? (Choose three)
Proof of Concept (POC)
Policy Optimizer
Security Lifecycle Review (SLR)
Ultimate Test Drive
Expedition
When evaluating Palo Alto Networks products, prospective customers need tools that can help them assess compatibility, performance, and value within their existing architecture. The following tools are the most relevant:
Why "Proof of Concept (POC)" (Correct Answer A)?A Proof of Concept is a hands-on evaluation that allows the customer to deploy and test Palo Alto Networks products directly within their environment. This enables them to assess real-world performance, compatibility, and operational impact.
Why "Security Lifecycle Review (SLR)" (Correct Answer C)?An SLR provides a detailed report of a customer’s network security posture based on data collected during a short evaluation period. It highlights risks, vulnerabilities, and active threats in the customer’s network, demonstrating how Palo Alto Networks solutions can address those risks. SLR is a powerful tool for justifying the value of a product in the customer’s architecture.
Why "Ultimate Test Drive" (Correct Answer D)?The Ultimate Test Drive is a guided hands-on workshop provided by Palo Alto Networks that allows prospective customers to explore product features and capabilities in a controlled environment. It is ideal for customers who want to evaluate products without deploying them in their production network.
Why not "Policy Optimizer" (Option B)?Policy Optimizer is used after a product has been deployed to refine security policies by identifying unused or overly permissive rules. It is not designed for pre-deployment evaluations.
Why not "Expedition" (Option E)?Expedition is a migration tool that assists with the conversion of configurations from third-party firewalls or existing Palo Alto Networks firewalls. It is not a tool for evaluating thesuitability of products in the customer’s architecture.
A company with Palo Alto Networks NGFWs protecting its physical data center servers is experiencing a performance issue on its Active Directory (AD) servers due to high numbers of requests and updates the NGFWs are placing on the servers. How can the NGFWs be enabled to efficiently identify users without overloading the AD servers?
Configure Cloud Identity Engine to learn the users' IP address-user mappings from the AD authentication logs.
Configure an NGFW as a GlobalProtect gateway, then have all users run GlobalProtect Windows SSO to gather user information.
Configure data redistribution to redistribute IP address-user mappings from a hub NGFW to the other spoke NGFWs.
Configure an NGFW as a GlobalProtect gateway, then have all users run GlobalProtect agents to gather user information.
When high traffic from Palo Alto Networks NGFWs to Active Directory servers causes performance issues, optimizing the way NGFWs gather user-to-IP mappings is critical. Palo Alto Networks offers multiple ways to collect user identity information, andCloud Identity Engineprovides a solution that reduces the load on AD servers while still ensuring efficient and accurate mapping.
Option A (Correct):Cloud Identity Engineallows NGFWs to gather user-to-IP mappings directly from Active Directory authentication logs or other identity sources without placing heavy traffic on the AD servers. By leveraging this feature, the NGFW can offload authentication-related tasks and efficiently identify users without overloading AD servers. This solution is scalable and minimizes the overhead typically caused by frequent User-ID queries to AD servers.
Option B:UsingGlobalProtect Windows SSOto gather user information can add complexity and is not the most efficient solution for this problem. It requires all users to install GlobalProtect agents, which may not be feasible in all environments and can introduce operational challenges.
Option C:Data redistributioninvolves redistributing user-to-IP mappings from one NGFW (hub) to other NGFWs (spokes). While this can reduce the number of queries sent to AD servers, it assumes the mappings are already being collected from AD servers by the hub, which means the performance issue on the AD servers would persist.
Option D:UsingGlobalProtect agentsto gather user information is a valid method for environments where GlobalProtect is already deployed, but it is not the most efficient or straightforward solution for the given problem. It also introduces dependencies on agent deployment, configuration, and management.
How to Implement Cloud Identity Engine for User-ID Mapping:
EnableCloud Identity Enginefrom the Palo Alto Networks console.
Integrate the Cloud Identity Engine with the AD servers to allow it to retrieve authentication logs directly.
Configure the NGFWs to use the Cloud Identity Engine for User-ID mappings instead of querying the AD servers directly.
Monitor performance to ensure the AD servers are no longer overloaded, and mappings are being retrieved efficiently.
References:
Cloud Identity Engine Overview:
User-ID Best Practices:
A security engineer has been tasked with protecting a company's on-premises web servers but is not authorized to purchase a web application firewall (WAF).
Which Palo Alto Networks solution will protect the company from SQL injection zero-day, command injection zero-day, Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) attacks, and IIS exploits?
Threat Prevention and PAN-OS 11.x
Advanced Threat Prevention and PAN-OS 11.x
Threat Prevention, Advanced URL Filtering, and PAN-OS 10.2 (and higher)
Advanced WildFire and PAN-OS 10.0 (and higher)
Protecting web servers from advanced threats like SQL injection, command injection, XSS attacks, and IIS exploits requires a solution capable of deep packet inspection, behavioral analysis, andinline prevention of zero-day attacks. The most effective solution here isAdvanced Threat Prevention (ATP)combined withPAN-OS 11.x.
Why "Advanced Threat Prevention and PAN-OS 11.x" (Correct Answer B)?Advanced Threat Prevention (ATP) enhances traditional threat prevention by usinginline deep learning modelsto detect and block advanced zero-day threats, includingSQL injection, command injection, and XSS attacks. With PAN-OS 11.x, ATP extends its detection capabilities to detect unknown exploits without relying on signature-based methods. This functionality is critical for protecting web servers in scenarios where a dedicated WAF is unavailable.
ATP provides the following benefits:
Inline prevention of zero-day threats using deep learning models.
Real-time detection of attacks like SQL injection and XSS.
Enhanced protection for web server platforms like IIS.
Full integration with the Palo Alto Networks Next-Generation Firewall (NGFW).
Why not "Threat Prevention and PAN-OS 11.x" (Option A)?Threat Prevention relies primarily on signature-based detection for known threats. While it provides basic protection, it lacks the capability to block zero-day attacks using advanced methods like inline deep learning. For zero-day SQL injection and XSS attacks, Threat Prevention alone is insufficient.
Why not "Threat Prevention, Advanced URL Filtering, and PAN-OS 10.2 (and higher)" (Option C)?While this combination includes Advanced URL Filtering (useful for blocking malicious URLs associated with exploits), it still relies onThreat Prevention, which is signature-based. This combination does not provide the zero-day protection needed for advanced injection attacks or XSS vulnerabilities.
Why not "Advanced WildFire and PAN-OS 10.0 (and higher)" (Option D)?Advanced WildFire is focused on analyzing files and executables in a sandbox environment to identify malware. While it is excellent for identifying malware, it is not designed to provide inline prevention for web-based injection attacks or XSS exploits targeting web servers.
A systems engineer should create a profile that blocks which category to protect a customer from ransomware URLs by using Advanced URL Filtering?
Ransomware
High Risk
Scanning Activity
Command and Control
When configuring Advanced URL Filtering on a Palo Alto Networks firewall, the "Ransomware" category should be explicitly blocked to protect customers from URLs associated with ransomware activities. Ransomware URLs typically host malicious code or scripts designed to encrypt user data and demand a ransom. By blocking the "Ransomware" category, systems engineers can proactively prevent users from accessing such URLs.
Why "Ransomware" (Correct Answer A)?The "Ransomware" category is specifically curated by Palo Alto Networks to include URLs known to deliver ransomware or support ransomware operations. Blocking this category ensures that any URL categorized as part of this list will be inaccessible to end-users, significantly reducing the risk of ransomware attacks.
Why not "High Risk" (Option B)?While the "High Risk" category includes potentially malicious sites, it is broader and less targeted. It may not always block ransomware-specific URLs. "High Risk" includes a range of websites that are flagged based on factors like bad reputation or hosting malicious content in general. It is less focused than the "Ransomware" category.
Why not "Scanning Activity" (Option C)?The "Scanning Activity" category focuses on URLs used in vulnerability scans, automated probing, or reconnaissance by attackers. Although such activity could be a precursor to ransomware attacks, it does not directly block ransomware URLs.
Why not "Command and Control" (Option D)?The "Command and Control" category is designed to block URLs used by malware or compromised systems to communicate with their operators. While some ransomware may utilize command-and-control (C2) servers, blocking C2 URLs alone does not directly target ransomware URLs themselves.
By using the Advanced URL Filtering profile and blocking the "Ransomware" category, the firewall applies targeted controls to mitigate ransomware-specific threats.
While responding to a customer RFP, a systems engineer (SE) is presented the question, "How do PANW firewalls enable the mapping of transactions as part of Zero Trust principles?" Which two narratives can the SE use to respond to the question? (Choose two.)
Emphasize Zero Trust as an ideology, and that the customer decides how to align to Zero Trust principles.
Reinforce the importance of decryption and security protections to verify traffic that is not malicious.
Explain how the NGFW can be placed in the network so it has visibility into every traffic flow.
Describe how Palo Alto Networks NGFW Security policies are built by using users, applications, and data objects.
The question asks how Palo Alto Networks (PANW) Strata Hardware Firewalls enable the mapping of transactions as part of Zero Trust principles, requiring a systems engineer (SE) to provide two narratives for a customer RFP response. Zero Trust is a security model that assumes no trust by default, requiring continuous verification of all transactions, users, and devices—inside and outside the network. The Palo Alto Networks Next-Generation Firewall (NGFW), part of the Strataportfolio, supports this through its advanced visibility, decryption, and policy enforcement capabilities. Below is a detailed explanation of why options B and D are the correct narratives, verified against official Palo Alto Networks documentation.
Step 1: Understanding Zero Trust and Transaction Mapping in PAN-OS
Zero Trust principles, as defined by frameworks like NIST SP 800-207, emphasize identifying and verifying every transaction (e.g., network flows, application requests) based on context such as user identity, application, and data. For Palo Alto Networks NGFWs, "mapping of transactions" refers to the ability to identify, classify, and control network traffic with granular detail, enabling verification and enforcement aligned with Zero Trust.
The PAN-OS operating system achieves this through:
App-ID: Identifies applications regardless of port or protocol.
User-ID: Maps IP addresses to user identities.
Content-ID: Inspects and protects content, including decryption for visibility.
Security Policies: Enforces rules based on these mappings.
Which two statements correctly describe best practices for sizing a firewall deployment with decryption enabled? (Choose two.)
SSL decryption traffic amounts vary from network to network.
Large average transaction sizes consume more processing power to decrypt.
Perfect Forward Secrecy (PFS) ephemeral key exchange algorithms such as Diffie-Hellman Ephemeral (DHE) and Elliptic-Curve Diffie-Hellman Exchange (ECDHE) consume more processing resources than Rivest-Shamir-Adleman (RSA) algorithms.
Rivest-Shamir-Adleman (RSA) certificate authentication method (not the RSA key exchange algorithm) consumes more resources than Elliptic Curve Digital Signature Algorithm (ECDSA), but ECDSA is more secure.
When planning a firewall deployment with SSL/TLS decryption enabled, it is crucial to consider the additional processing overhead introduced by decrypting and inspecting encrypted traffic. Here are the details for each statement:
Why "SSL decryption traffic amounts vary from network to network" (Correct Answer A)?SSL decryption traffic varies depending on the organization’s specific network environment, user behavior, and applications. For example, networks with heavy web traffic, cloud applications, or encrypted VoIP traffic will have more SSL/TLS decryption processing requirements. This variability means each deployment must be properly assessed and sized accordingly.
Why "Perfect Forward Secrecy (PFS) ephemeral key exchange algorithms such as Diffie-Hellman Ephemeral (DHE) and Elliptic-Curve Diffie-Hellman Exchange (ECDHE) consume more processing resources than Rivest-Shamir-Adleman (RSA) algorithms" (Correct Answer C)?PFS algorithms like DHE and ECDHE generate unique session keys for each connection, ensuring better security but requiring significantly more processing power compared to RSA key exchange. When decryption is enabled, firewalls must handle these computationally expensive operations for every encrypted session, impacting performance and sizing requirements.
Why not "Large average transaction sizes consume more processing power to decrypt" (Option B)?While large transaction sizes can consume additional resources, SSL/TLS decryption is more dependent on the number of sessions and the complexity of the encryption algorithms used, rather than the size of the transactions. Hence, this is not a primary best practice consideration.
Why not "Rivest-Shamir-Adleman (RSA) certificate authentication method consumes more resources than Elliptic Curve Digital Signature Algorithm (ECDSA), but ECDSA is more secure" (Option D)?This statement discusses certificate authentication methods, not SSL/TLS decryption performance. While ECDSA is more efficient and secure than RSA, it is not directly relevant to sizing considerations for firewall deployments with decryption enabled.
What does Policy Optimizer allow a systems engineer to do for an NGFW?
Recommend best practices on new policy creation
Show unused licenses for Cloud-Delivered Security Services (CDSS) subscriptions and firewalls
Identify Security policy rules with unused applications
Act as a migration tool to import policies from third-party vendors
Policy Optimizer is a feature designed to help administrators improve the efficiency and effectiveness of security policies on Palo Alto Networks Next-Generation Firewalls (NGFWs). It focuses on identifying unused or overly permissive policies to streamline and optimize the configuration.
Why "Identify Security policy rules with unused applications" (Correct Answer C)?Policy Optimizer provides visibility into existing security policies and identifies rules thathave unused or outdated applications. For example:
It can detect if a rule allows applications that are no longer in use.
It can identify rules with excessive permissions, enabling administrators to refine them for better security and performance.By addressing these issues, Policy Optimizer helps reduce the attack surface and improves the overall manageability of the firewall.
Why not "Recommend best practices on new policy creation" (Option A)?Policy Optimizer focuses on optimizingexisting policies, not creating new ones. While best practices can be applied during policy refinement, recommending new policy creation is not its purpose.
Why not "Show unused licenses for Cloud-Delivered Security Services (CDSS) subscriptions and firewalls" (Option B)?Policy Optimizer is not related to license management or tracking. Identifying unused licenses is outside the scope of its functionality.
Why not "Act as a migration tool to import policies from third-party vendors" (Option D)?Policy Optimizer does not function as a migration tool. While Palo Alto Networks offers tools for third-party firewall migration, this is separate from the Policy Optimizer feature.
Which use case is valid for Palo Alto Networks Next-Generation Firewalls (NGFWs)?
Code-embedded NGFWs provide enhanced internet of things (IoT) security by allowing PAN-OS code to be run on devices that do not support embedded virtual machine (VM) images.
Serverless NGFW code security provides public cloud security for code-only deployments that do not leverage virtual machine (VM) instances or containerized services.
IT/OT segmentation firewalls allow operational technology resources in plant networks to securely interface with IT resources in the corporate network.
PAN-OS GlobalProtect gateways allow companies to run malware and exploit prevention modules on their endpoints without installing endpoint agents.
Palo Alto Networks Next-Generation Firewalls (NGFWs) provide robust security features across a variety of use cases. Let’s analyze each option:
A. Code-embedded NGFWs provide enhanced IoT security by allowing PAN-OS code to be run on devices that do not support embedded VM images.
This statement is incorrect. NGFWs do not operate as "code-embedded" solutions for IoT devices. Instead, they protect IoT devices through advanced threat prevention, device identification, and segmentation capabilities.
B. Serverless NGFW code security provides public cloud security for code-only deployments that do not leverage VM instances or containerized services.
This is not a valid use case. Palo Alto NGFWs provide security for public cloud environments using VM-series firewalls, CN-series (containerized firewalls), and Prisma Cloud for securing serverless architectures. NGFWs do not operate in "code-only" environments.
C. IT/OT segmentation firewalls allow operational technology (OT) resources in plant networks to securely interface with IT resources in the corporate network.
This is a valid use case. Palo Alto NGFWs are widely used in industrial environments to provide IT/OT segmentation, ensuring that operational technology systems in plants or manufacturing facilities can securely communicate with IT networks while protecting against cross-segment threats. Features like App-ID, User-ID, and Threat Prevention are leveraged for this segmentation.
D. PAN-OS GlobalProtect gateways allow companies to run malware and exploit prevention modules on their endpoints without installing endpoint agents.
This is incorrect. GlobalProtect gateways provide secure remote access to corporate networks and extend the NGFW’s threat prevention capabilities to endpoints, but endpoint agents are required to enforce malware and exploit prevention modules.
Key Takeaways:
IT/OT segmentation with NGFWs is a real and critical use case in industries like manufacturing and utilities.
The other options describe features or scenarios that are not applicable or valid for NGFWs.
References:
Palo Alto Networks NGFW Use Cases
Industrial Security with NGFWs
Which technique is an example of a DNS attack that Advanced DNS Security can detect and prevent?
High entropy DNS domains
Polymorphic DNS
CNAME cloaking
DNS domain rebranding
Advanced DNS Security on Palo Alto Networks firewalls is designed to identify and prevent a wide range of DNS-based attacks. Among the listed options, "High entropy DNS domains" is a specific example of a DNS attack that Advanced DNS Security can detect and block.
Why "High entropy DNS domains" (Correct Answer A)?High entropy DNS domains are often used in attacks where randomly generated domain names (e.g., gfh34ksdu.com) are utilized by malware or bots to evade detection. This is a hallmark of Domain Generation Algorithms (DGA)-based attacks. Palo Alto Networks firewalls with Advanced DNS Security use machine learning to detect such domains by analyzing the entropy (randomness) of DNS queries. High entropy values indicate the likelihood of a dynamically generated or malicious domain.
Why not "Polymorphic DNS" (Option B)?While polymorphic DNS refers to techniques that dynamically change DNS records to avoid detection, it is not specifically identified as an attack type mitigated by Advanced DNS Security in Palo Alto Networks documentation. The firewall focuses more on the behavior of DNS queries, such as detecting DGA domains or anomalous DNS traffic patterns.
Why not "CNAME cloaking" (Option C)?CNAME cloaking involves using CNAME records to redirect DNS queries to malicious or hidden domains. Although Palo Alto firewalls may detect and block malicious DNS redirections, the focus of Advanced DNS Security is primarily on identifying patterns of DNS abuse like DGA domains, tunneling, or high entropy queries.
Why not "DNS domain rebranding" (Option D)?DNS domain rebranding involves changing the domain names associated with malicious activity to evade detection. This is typically a tactic used for persistence but is not an example of a DNS attack type specifically addressed by Advanced DNS Security.
Advanced DNS Security focuses on dynamic, real-time identification of suspicious DNS patterns, such as high entropy domains, DNS tunneling, or protocol violations. High entropy DNS domains are directly tied to attack mechanisms like DGAs, making this the correct answer.
Which two methods are valid ways to populate user-to-IP mappings? (Choose two.)
XML API
Captive portal
User-ID
SCP log ingestion
Step 1: Understanding User-to-IP Mappings
User-to-IP mappings are the foundation of User-ID, a core feature of Strata Hardware Firewalls (e.g., PA-400 Series, PA-5400 Series). These mappings link a user’s identity (e.g., username) to their device’s IP address, enabling policy enforcement based on user identity rather than just IP. Palo Alto Networks supports multiple methods to populate these mappings, depending on thenetwork environment and authentication mechanisms.
Purpose:Allows the firewall to apply user-based policies, monitor user activity, and generate user-specific logs.
Strata Context:On a PA-5445, User-ID integrates with App-ID and security subscriptions to enforce granular access control.
What is used to stop a DNS-based threat?
DNS proxy
Buffer overflow protection
DNS tunneling
DNS sinkholing
DNS-based threats, such as DNS tunneling, phishing, or malware command-and-control (C2) activities, are commonly used by attackers to exfiltrate data or establish malicious communications. Palo Alto Networks firewalls provide several mechanisms to address these threats, and the correct method isDNS sinkholing.
Why "DNS sinkholing" (Correct Answer D)?DNS sinkholing redirects DNS queries for malicious domains to an internal or non-routable IP address, effectively preventing communication with malicious domains. When a user or endpoint tries to connect to a malicious domain, the sinkhole DNS entry ensures the traffic is blocked or routed to a controlled destination.
DNS sinkholing is especially effective for blocking malware trying to contact its C2 server or preventing data exfiltration.
Why not "DNS proxy" (Option A)?A DNS proxy is used to forward DNS queries from endpoints to an upstream DNS server. While it can be part of a network's DNS setup, it does not actively stop DNS-based threats.
Why not "Buffer overflow protection" (Option B)?Buffer overflow protection is a method used to prevent memory-related attacks, such as exploiting software vulnerabilities. It is unrelated to DNS-based threat prevention.
Why not "DNS tunneling" (Option C)?DNS tunneling is itself a type of DNS-based threat where attackers encode malicious traffic within DNS queries and responses. This option refers to the threat itself, not the method to stop it.
A systems engineer (SE) is working with a customer that is fully cloud-deployed for all applications. The customer is interested in Palo Alto Networks NGFWs but describes the following challenges:
"Our apps are in AWS and Azure, with whom we have contracts and minimum-revenue guarantees. We would use the built-in firewall on the cloud service providers (CSPs), but the need for centralized policy management to reduce human error is more important."
Which recommendations should the SE make?
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 NGFWs in AWS and VM-Series firewall in Azure; the customer selects a PAYG licensing Panorama deployment in their CSP of choice.
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 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.
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.
References:
Palo Alto Networks documentation on Cloud NGFW
Panorama overview in Palo Alto Knowledge Base
VM-Series firewalls deployment guide in CSPs: Palo Alto Documentation
When a customer needs to understand how Palo Alto Networks NGFWs lower the risk of exploitation by newly announced vulnerabilities known to be actively attacked, which solution and functionality delivers the most value?
Advanced URL Filtering uses machine learning (ML) to learn which malicious URLs are being utilized by the attackers, then block the resulting traffic.
Advanced Threat Prevention's command injection and SQL injection functions use inline deep learning against zero-day threats.
Single Pass Architecture and parallel processing ensure traffic is efficiently scanned against any enabled Cloud-Delivered Security Services (CDSS) subscription.
WildFire loads custom OS images to ensure that the sandboxing catches any activity that would affect the customer's environment.
The most effective way to reduce the risk of exploitation bynewly announced vulnerabilitiesis throughAdvanced Threat Prevention (ATP). ATP usesinline deep learningto identify and block exploitation attempts, even for zero-day vulnerabilities, in real time.
Why "Advanced Threat Prevention’s command injection and SQL injection functionsuse inline deep learning against zero-day threats" (Correct Answer B)?Advanced Threat Prevention leveragesdeep learning modelsdirectly in the data path, which allows it to analyze traffic in real time and detect patterns of exploitation, including newly discovered vulnerabilities being actively exploited in the wild. It specifically targets advanced tactics like:
Command injection.
SQL injection.
Memory-based exploits.
Protocol evasion techniques.
This functionality lowers the risk of exploitation byactively blocking attack attemptsbased on their behavior, even when a signature is not yet available. This approach makes ATP the most valuable solution for addressing new and actively exploited vulnerabilities.
Why not "Advanced URL Filtering uses machine learning (ML) to learn which malicious URLs are being utilized by the attackers, then block the resulting traffic" (Option A)?While Advanced URL Filtering is highly effective at blocking access to malicious websites, it does not provide the inline analysis necessary to prevent direct exploitation of vulnerabilities. Exploitation often happens within the application or protocol layer, which Advanced URL Filtering does not inspect.
Why not "Single Pass Architecture and parallel processing ensure traffic is efficiently scanned against any enabled Cloud-Delivered Security Services (CDSS) subscription" (Option C)?Single Pass Architecture improves performance by ensuring all enabled services (like Threat Prevention, URL Filtering, etc.) process traffic efficiently. However, it is not a feature that directly addresses vulnerability exploitation or zero-day attack detection.
Why not "WildFire loads custom OS images to ensure that the sandboxing catches any activity that would affect the customer's environment" (Option D)?WildFire is a sandboxing solution designed to detect malicious files and executables. While it is useful for analyzing malware, it does not provide inline protection against exploitation of newly announced vulnerabilities, especially those targeting network protocols or applications.
Regarding APIs, a customer RFP states: "The vendor’s firewall solution must provide an API with an enforcement mechanism to deactivate API keys after two hours." How should the response address this clause?
Yes - This is the default setting for API keys.
No - The PAN-OS XML API does not support keys.
No - The API keys can be made, but there is no method to deactivate them based on time.
Yes - The default setting must be changed from no limit to 120 minutes.
Palo Alto Networks' PAN-OS supports API keys for authentication when interacting with the firewall’s RESTful and XML-based APIs. By default, API keys do not have an expiration time set, but the expiration time for API keys can be configured by an administrator to meet specific requirements, such as a time-based deactivation after two hours. This is particularly useful for compliance and security purposes, where API keys should not remain active indefinitely.
Here’s an evaluation of the options:
Option A:This is incorrect because the default setting for API keys does not include an expiration time. By default, API keys are valid indefinitely unless explicitly configured otherwise.
Option B:This is incorrect because PAN-OS fully supports API keys. The API keys are integral to managing access to the firewall's APIs and provide a secure method for authentication.
Option C:This is incorrect because PAN-OS does support API key expiration when explicitly configured. While the default is "no expiration," the feature to configure an expiration time (e.g., 2 hours) is available.
Option D (Correct):The correct response to the RFP clause is that the default API key settings need to be modified to set the expiration time to 120 minutes (2 hours). This aligns with the customer requirement to enforce API key deactivation based on time. Administrators can configure this using the PAN-OS management interface or the CLI.
How to Configure API Key Expiration (Steps):
Access theWeb InterfaceorCLIon the firewall.
Navigate toDevice > Management > API Key Lifetime Settings(on the GUI).
Set the desired expiration time (e.g., 120 minutes).
Alternatively, use the CLI to configure the API key expiration:
set deviceconfig system api-key-expiry
commit
Verify the configuration using the show command or by testing API calls to ensure the key expires after the set duration.
References:
Palo Alto Networks API Documentation:
Configuration Guide: Managing API Key Expiration
A customer claims that Advanced WildFire miscategorized a file as malicious and wants proof, because another vendor has said that the file is benign.
How could the systems engineer assure the customer that Advanced WildFire was accurate?
Review the threat logs for information to provide to the customer.
Use the WildFire Analysis Report in the log to show the customer the malicious actions the file took when it was detonated.
Open a TAG ticket for the customer and allow support engineers to determine the appropriate action.
Do nothing because the customer will realize Advanced WildFire is right.
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 isnot 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.
References:
Palo Alto Networks documentation on WildFire
WildFire Analysis Reports
What is the minimum configuration to stop a Cobalt Strike Malleable C2 attack inline and in real time?
Next-Generation CASB on PAN-OS 10.1
Advanced Threat Prevention and PAN-OS 10.2
Threat Prevention and Advanced WildFire with PAN-OS 10.0
DNS Security, Threat Prevention, and Advanced WildFire with PAN-OS 9.x
Cobalt Strike is a popular post-exploitation framework often used by attackers for Command and Control (C2) operations. Malleable C2 profiles allow attackers to modify the behavior of their C2 communication, making detection more difficult. Stopping these attacks inreal timerequires deep inline inspection and the ability to block zero-day and evasive threats.
Why "Advanced Threat Prevention and PAN-OS 10.2" (Correct Answer B)?Advanced Threat Prevention (ATP) on PAN-OS 10.2 usesinline deep learning modelsto detect and blockCobalt Strike Malleable C2 attacksin real time. ATP is designed to prevent evasive techniques and zero-day threats, which is essential for blocking Malleable C2. PAN-OS 10.2 introduces enhanced capabilities for detecting malicious traffic patterns and inline analysis of encrypted traffic.
ATP examines traffic behavior and signature-less threats, effectively stopping evasive C2 profiles.
PAN-OS 10.2 includes real-time protections specifically for Malleable C2.
Why not "Next-Generation CASB on PAN-OS 10.1" (Option A)?Next-Generation CASB (Cloud Access Security Broker) is designed to secure SaaS applications and does not provide the inline C2 protection required to stop Malleable C2 attacks. CASB is not related to Command and Control detection.
Why not "Threat Prevention and Advanced WildFire with PAN-OS 10.0" (Option C)?Threat Prevention and Advanced WildFire are effective for detecting and preventing malware and known threats. However, they rely heavily on signatures and sandboxing for analysis, which is not sufficient for stoppingreal-time evasive C2 traffic. PAN-OS 10.0lacks the advanced inline capabilities provided by ATP in PAN-OS 10.2.
Why not "DNS Security, Threat Prevention, and Advanced WildFire with PAN-OS 9.x" (Option D)?While DNS Security and Threat Prevention are valuable for blocking malicious domains and known threats, PAN-OS 9.x does not provide the inline deep learning capabilities needed for real-time detection and prevention of Malleable C2 attacks. The absence of advanced behavioral analysis in PAN-OS 9.x makes this combination ineffective against advanced C2 attacks.
Copyright © 2021-2025 CertsTopics. All Rights Reserved