Cisco 350-701 Implementing and Operating Cisco Security Core Technologies Exam Dumps and Practice Test Questions Set 11 Q 151-165
Visit here for our full Cisco 350-701 exam dumps and practice test questions.
Question 151:
Which Cisco security solution provides automated threat response by integrating with multiple security products to orchestrate coordinated actions?
A) Cisco SecureX
B) Cisco DNA Center
C) Cisco Prime Infrastructure
D) Cisco Wireless Controller
Answer: A
Explanation:
Modern security operations face challenges managing numerous security tools that generate overwhelming volumes of alerts, often operating in isolation without coordination. Security teams struggle with alert fatigue, delayed response times, and inconsistent remediation processes. Organizations need platforms that integrate disparate security tools, correlate alerts, automate investigations, and orchestrate coordinated responses across the security infrastructure. Cisco SecureX is a cloud-native, built-in platform that connects the Cisco security portfolio and third-party security tools delivering unified visibility, automated threat response, and simplified security operations.
SecureX operates as an integration and orchestration platform that connects to security products through APIs collecting telemetry, threat detections, and contextual information from across the security ecosystem. The platform aggregates data from Cisco products including Secure Endpoint, Secure Firewall, Umbrella, Secure Email, Duo, ISE, and Secure Network Analytics, as well as third-party tools through extensive integration library. This unified data collection provides comprehensive visibility into the security posture across networks, endpoints, cloud, and applications. The platform correlates alerts from multiple sources identifying relationships between seemingly independent events that actually represent stages of a coordinated attack campaign. By connecting related indicators, SecureX reduces alert volumes and provides security analysts with complete attack context.
The threat response capabilities enable both manual investigations and automated response workflows. The threat response module allows analysts to pivot between different data sources investigating indicators of compromise like IP addresses, domains, file hashes, or URLs. When investigating a suspicious IP address, analysts can query integrated security tools to determine which endpoints communicated with that IP, what domains resolve to it, whether it appears in threat intelligence feeds, and what actions security tools have taken regarding it. This unified investigation eliminates the need to log into multiple consoles and manually correlate information across tools. Automated response workflows called orchestration playbooks execute predetermined response actions when specific conditions are met. For example, a playbook might automatically quarantine endpoints, block malicious domains, update firewall rules, and create incident tickets when malware is detected.
SecureX orchestration supports both pre-built workflows provided by Cisco and custom playbooks created by organizations to address specific operational requirements. The workflow builder provides a visual interface for designing orchestration logic including conditional branching, loops, and integration with dozens of security products. Workflows can be triggered manually by analysts, automatically based on alerts, or scheduled to run periodically. The platform includes case management capabilities for tracking security incidents, assigning tasks, and documenting investigation activities. Threat intelligence integration enriches detections with context from Cisco Talos and third-party feeds. The SecureX platform is provided at no additional cost to organizations using Cisco security products, enabling unified security operations without requiring separate SOAR platform purchases. Organizations should leverage SecureX to break down silos between security tools, automate repetitive response tasks, and accelerate mean time to detect and respond to threats.
A) Cisco SecureX is the correct answer as it provides security orchestration, automation, and response integrating multiple security products. B) Cisco DNA Center provides network management and automation but not security orchestration and automated threat response. C) Cisco Prime Infrastructure provides network management for wireless and wired infrastructure, not security orchestration. D) Cisco Wireless Controller manages wireless access points, not security orchestration and threat response.
Question 152:
An administrator needs to configure Cisco Firepower to inspect HTTPS traffic. What must be configured first?
A) Access control policy
B) SSL/TLS decryption policy
C) Intrusion policy
D) File policy
Answer: B
Explanation:
HTTPS encryption protects data privacy during transmission but also enables attackers to hide malicious content within encrypted channels, bypassing security inspection. Modern malware, command-and-control communications, and data exfiltration frequently use HTTPS to evade detection by security tools that cannot inspect encrypted traffic. Organizations need capabilities to decrypt, inspect, and re-encrypt HTTPS traffic enabling security policies to examine the actual content. Cisco Firepower requires SSL/TLS decryption policy configuration before other security features can inspect HTTPS traffic content.
SSL/TLS decryption in Firepower operates by positioning the firewall as a proxy between clients and destination servers. When a client attempts an HTTPS connection, Firepower intercepts the connection, establishes a separate encrypted session with the destination server, and creates a new encrypted session with the client using certificates signed by Firepower’s certificate authority. This man-in-the-middle approach enables Firepower to decrypt traffic from the client, inspect the unencrypted content against security policies, then re-encrypt before forwarding to the destination. The SSL decryption policy defines which traffic should be decrypted based on criteria including source and destination networks, destination ports, URL categories, applications, and user identities. Policies can specify decrypt actions for traffic requiring inspection or do-not-decrypt actions for traffic exempted from decryption.
Several considerations guide SSL decryption policy configuration. Organizations must install Firepower’s certificate authority certificate on client devices to prevent certificate warnings when Firepower re-signs destination certificates. Without this trusted CA installation, users receive browser warnings for every HTTPS site because the certificate chain is broken by Firepower’s re-signing. Certain traffic categories should be exempted from decryption including financial and healthcare sites due to privacy regulations, sites using certificate pinning that will break if certificates are modified, and traffic to sites requiring client certificates for authentication. Performance impact must be considered because SSL decryption is computationally intensive, potentially requiring hardware acceleration or limiting decryption to high-priority traffic based on organizational risk tolerance.
Once SSL decryption policy is configured and HTTPS traffic is being decrypted, all other Firepower security features become effective for encrypted traffic. Intrusion prevention can detect exploitation attempts and malware signatures in decrypted HTTPS. URL filtering can block access to malicious or policy-violating websites regardless of encryption. Application control can identify and control applications tunneling through HTTPS. File policies can block malicious files downloaded over HTTPS. Malware defense can scan files for threats before they reach endpoints. Without SSL decryption, these security features only see encrypted data and cannot provide meaningful protection. Organizations should implement SSL decryption strategically, balancing security visibility needs against privacy considerations, regulatory requirements, and performance impacts. Documenting which traffic is decrypted and maintaining appropriate controls over decryption visibility addresses privacy and compliance concerns while enabling security operations.
A) Access control policy defines traffic filtering rules but SSL decryption must be configured first to enable inspection of HTTPS content. B) SSL/TLS decryption policy is the correct answer as it must be configured before Firepower can inspect encrypted HTTPS traffic. C) Intrusion policy defines IPS rules but requires decryption to inspect HTTPS traffic. D) File policy controls file detection and blocking but requires decryption to inspect files within HTTPS.
Question 153:
Which command is used on Cisco IOS devices to display the current configuration of access control lists?
A) show running-config
B) show access-lists
C) show ip interface brief
D) show version
Answer: B
Explanation:
Access control lists are fundamental security features on Cisco network devices providing packet filtering based on layer 3 and layer 4 information including source and destination IP addresses, protocols, and port numbers. ACLs implement security policies at network boundaries, control traffic flows between network segments, and protect infrastructure devices from unauthorized access. Network administrators must frequently verify ACL configurations, troubleshoot connectivity issues caused by filtering, and audit ACL policies for compliance. Understanding the appropriate commands for viewing ACL configurations is essential for effective network security management.
The show access-lists command displays all configured access control lists on a Cisco IOS device including both standard and extended ACLs, IPv4 and IPv6 ACLs, and named and numbered ACLs. The output includes the complete ACL configuration showing each access control entry with permit or deny actions, protocol specifications, source and destination address criteria, port numbers, and match counters indicating how many packets have matched each ACE. The match counters are particularly valuable for troubleshooting because they reveal whether traffic is matching ACL entries as expected or if ACL logic needs adjustment. The command shows ACLs regardless of whether they are applied to interfaces, enabling administrators to review configured ACLs before applying them or verify ACL logic independently of interface assignments.
Additional variations of the command provide more specific output. The command show access-lists followed by an ACL name or number displays only the specified ACL rather than all configured ACLs, useful when working with specific policies on devices with numerous ACLs. The command show ip access-lists displays only IPv4 ACLs excluding IPv6 ACLs and other ACL types. On devices supporting object groups, the show access-lists command resolves object group references displaying the actual addresses or ports contained within groups, or object groups can be viewed separately using show object-group commands. Time-based ACLs display their effective schedules and current status indicating whether they are active or inactive based on configured time ranges.
To verify where ACLs are applied, the show ip interface command displays interface configurations including which ACLs are applied inbound and outbound on each interface. This command helps troubleshoot scenarios where ACLs are configured but not producing expected results because they are not applied to interfaces or are applied in the wrong direction. The show running-config command displays the complete device configuration including ACL definitions and interface applications providing comprehensive view but with more verbose output than targeted ACL commands. For security auditing and documentation, administrators should regularly capture show access-lists output documenting ACL policies, reviewing match counters to identify unused ACEs that can be removed, and validating that ACL logic implements intended security policies. Proper ACL management includes maintaining documentation, using meaningful ACL names rather than numbers for clarity, and implementing consistent structure and formatting conventions.
A) show running-config displays complete device configuration including ACLs but show access-lists provides focused ACL-specific output. B) show access-lists is the correct answer as it specifically displays all configured access control lists with match statistics. C) show ip interface brief displays interface status and IP addresses but not ACL configurations. D) show version displays device hardware and software information, not access control lists.
Question 154:
What is the primary function of Cisco Secure Workload (formerly Tetration) in a data center security architecture?
A) Email security filtering
B) Workload protection and microsegmentation
C) Wireless intrusion prevention
D) VPN remote access
Answer: B
Explanation:
Modern data centers host complex application environments with hundreds or thousands of workloads including virtual machines, containers, and bare-metal servers. These workloads communicate through intricate application dependencies creating vast attack surfaces where lateral movement can occur after initial compromise. Traditional perimeter-focused security is insufficient because most data center traffic flows east-west between workloads rather than north-south through perimeter firewalls. Organizations need visibility into application dependencies, behavior-based threat detection, and granular segmentation policies that protect individual workloads. Cisco Secure Workload is a comprehensive workload protection platform providing application dependency mapping, behavior analysis, and policy-driven microsegmentation for data center and cloud environments.
Secure Workload operates by deploying lightweight software agents on workloads or using network-based telemetry collection from switches and network devices. Agents collect detailed telemetry including process-level activity, network communications, file access, and system calls providing comprehensive visibility into workload behavior. Network telemetry captures flow information revealing communication patterns between workloads. This collected data is sent to Secure Workload analytics platform which processes billions of telemetry records building application dependency maps that automatically discover how applications are structured, which workloads communicate with each other, what protocols and ports are used, and how traffic flows through the environment. These dependency maps provide visibility that is typically absent in dynamic cloud environments where manual documentation cannot keep pace with infrastructure changes.
The behavioral analysis capabilities use machine learning to establish baselines of normal workload behavior and detect anomalies indicating potential security incidents. Secure Workload monitors for suspicious activities including unexpected process executions suggesting malware, unauthorized network connections indicating lateral movement or command-and-control communications, privilege escalations, configuration changes, and policy violations. When anomalies are detected, alerts provide detailed context about the suspicious activity, affected workloads, and recommended responses. The forensic capabilities enable investigation of security incidents through historical analysis examining what processes were running, what connections were established, and what files were accessed before, during, and after incidents.
The microsegmentation capabilities enable enforcement of zero-trust security policies at the workload level. Based on discovered application dependencies, Secure Workload generates policy recommendations that permit only necessary communications between workloads. These policies are expressed as whitelist rules defining what traffic should be allowed rather than blacklist rules attempting to block known bad traffic. Policies can be enforced through software agents that implement host-based firewalls on each workload, or through integration with network infrastructure using features like SGTs in TrustSec environments. The policy simulation capability allows testing policies before enforcement preventing unintended application disruptions. Policies automatically adapt as applications scale or migrate because they are based on workload attributes and labels rather than static IP addresses. Organizations should implement Secure Workload to gain visibility into complex application environments, detect sophisticated threats through behavioral analysis, and implement defense-in-depth through workload-level segmentation that limits lateral movement and contains breaches.
A) Email security filtering is provided by Cisco Secure Email, not workload protection platforms. B) Workload protection and microsegmentation is the correct answer describing Secure Workload’s primary functions. C) Wireless intrusion prevention protects wireless networks, not data center workloads. D) VPN remote access provides connectivity for remote users, not workload protection and microsegmentation.
Question 155:
Which protocol does Cisco TrustSec use to propagate Security Group Tags across the network infrastructure?
A) RADIUS
B) Security Group Tag Exchange Protocol (SXP)
C) TACACS+
D) SNMP
Answer: B
Explanation:
Cisco TrustSec implements software-defined segmentation by tagging traffic with Security Group Tags that represent the security classification of the source. For TrustSec policies to be enforced throughout the network, SGT information must be propagated from where tags are assigned, typically during authentication at network access devices, to enforcement points throughout the network where SGACL policies are applied. In environments with newer network infrastructure supporting inline tagging, SGTs can be carried within Ethernet frames or IP packets. However, many deployments include legacy devices that cannot natively process or transport SGTs. Security Group Tag Exchange Protocol was developed to address this challenge by enabling propagation of IP-to-SGT mappings to devices throughout the network.
SXP operates as a control plane protocol that establishes TCP connections between network devices to exchange IP-to-SGT binding information. When a device assigns an SGT to traffic, such as an access switch assigning an SGT during authentication, that device becomes an SXP speaker that can share the binding with other devices. The access switch establishes an SXP connection to distribution switches, firewalls, or other enforcement points acting as SXP listeners. The speaker sends the IP address and corresponding SGT mapping to listeners enabling them to classify traffic from that IP address with the appropriate SGT even though the traffic itself does not carry inline tag information. This mapping propagation enables enforcement devices to apply SGACL policies based on source and destination SGTs even when the network path includes legacy devices that cannot transport inline tags.
SXP connections are configured with speaker and listener roles defining the direction of mapping information flow. A device can act as speaker, listener, or both depending on the network topology and where mappings need to be propagated. SXP supports connection modes including speaker where the device only sends mappings, listener where the device only receives mappings, and both where the device both sends and receives enabling SXP peering in complex topologies. Authentication ensures that only authorized devices exchange SXP information with options for password-based authentication or no authentication in highly trusted environments. SXP connections support multiple concurrent mappings enabling a single speaker to share thousands of IP-to-SGT bindings with listeners. Hold-down timers prevent rapid changes in SGT assignments from causing instability with configurable timers defining how long mappings remain valid after the speaker connection terminates.
The implementation of SXP involves planning speaker and listener placements to efficiently propagate mappings throughout the network. Access layer switches where authentication occurs and SGTs are initially assigned typically function as SXP speakers. Distribution switches, firewalls, and enforcement points typically function as SXP listeners receiving mappings from multiple access switches. Redundancy should be considered with SXP connections to multiple speakers preventing single points of failure in mapping propagation. Scalability must be evaluated because each SXP speaker maintains TCP connections to all configured listeners which may become a constraint in very large deployments. Modern deployments should prefer inline tagging using Cisco Trustworthy Systems capable of natively transporting SGTs within packets, using SXP only where legacy devices exist that cannot support inline tagging. Organizations implementing TrustSec should understand SXP’s role as the transitional technology enabling SGT-based segmentation in mixed environments containing both modern and legacy infrastructure.
A) RADIUS is used by ISE for authentication and initial SGT assignment but not for propagating tags between network devices. B) Security Group Tag Exchange Protocol (SXP) is the correct answer as it propagates IP-to-SGT mappings across network infrastructure. C) TACACS+ is used for device administration authentication, not for propagating Security Group Tags. D) SNMP is used for network management and monitoring, not for propagating Security Group Tags.
Question 156:
An administrator needs to configure Cisco ISE to automatically profil network devices. Which probe should be enabled?
A) DHCP probe
B) TACACS+ probe
C) VPN probe
D) Email probe
Answer: A
Explanation:
Device profiling in Cisco ISE enables automatic classification of endpoints connecting to the network by collecting characteristics and attributes that reveal device identity, type, and behavior. Accurate profiling is essential for implementing role-based access control, applying appropriate authorization policies, and detecting anomalies or rogue devices. ISE profiling operates through probes that collect device attributes from various network protocols and services. Understanding which probes provide what information enables administrators to configure optimal profiling coverage for their environments.
The DHCP probe is one of the most valuable profiling data sources because DHCP transactions reveal numerous device characteristics. When devices request IP addresses through DHCP, they include information in DHCP options fields that ISE can collect and analyze. DHCP Option 55 Parameter Request List indicates which DHCP options the device wants to receive, creating a fingerprint characteristic of specific device types. DHCP Option 60 Vendor Class Identifier contains vendor-specific information identifying device manufacturers. DHCP Option 12 Hostname provides device names that can indicate device type or function. The DHCP client identifier and hardware address provide unique device identifiers. ISE receives DHCP information through DHCP SPAN where DHCP traffic is mirrored to ISE interfaces, DHCP relay integration where relay agents forward DHCP packets to ISE, or RADIUS accounting from DHCP servers containing DHCP attributes.
Additional probes complement DHCP providing comprehensive profiling coverage. The RADIUS probe collects attributes from RADIUS authentication and accounting messages including calling-station-ID containing MAC addresses, NAS-Port-Type indicating connection type like wireless or wired, and device-specific attributes from 802.1X authentication. The SNMP probe queries network devices for endpoint information from MAC address tables, ARP tables, CDP/LLDP neighbor information, and interface descriptions. The NetFlow probe analyzes network traffic patterns identifying application usage and behavior characteristics. The HTTP probe examines user-agent strings from web traffic revealing operating systems and browser types. The DNS probe collects hostname information from DNS queries and responses. The NMAP probe actively scans endpoints discovering open ports and services though active scanning must be used cautiously to avoid disrupting endpoints.
ISE combines information from all enabled probes matching collected attributes against profiling policies that define device classifications. Profiling policies specify attribute conditions that must match for a device to be classified as a specific type such as Windows workstations, IP phones, printers, cameras, or medical devices. When sufficient attributes match a profiling policy with adequate certainty, ISE assigns the device to that profile. The profile assignment enables authorization policies to grant appropriate access based on device type, such as placing IP phones in voice VLANs, restricting IoT devices to isolated networks, or applying posture assessment only to workstations. Organizations should enable comprehensive probe coverage particularly DHCP and RADIUS probes which provide high-value profiling data with minimal operational impact. Regular review of profiling accuracy and tuning of profiling policies ensures devices are correctly classified enabling accurate authorization and security policies.
A) DHCP probe is the correct answer as it should be enabled for device profiling, collecting valuable device characteristics from DHCP transactions. B) TACACS+ probe is used for device administration, not for endpoint device profiling. C) VPN probe is not a standard ISE profiling probe; profiling uses protocols like DHCP, RADIUS, and SNMP. D) Email probe is not a standard ISE profiling probe for network device classification.
Question 157:
Which Cisco technology provides secure connectivity for remote users accessing corporate resources without requiring traditional VPN clients?
A) Cisco AnyConnect with SSL VPN
B) Cisco Secure Access by Duo (formerly Duo Network Gateway)
C) IPsec Site-to-Site VPN
D) Cisco SD-WAN
Answer: B
Explanation:
Traditional VPN solutions require client software installation, often cause connectivity challenges with complex applications, introduce latency, and provide overly broad network access once connected. Modern workforce mobility and cloud adoption require more flexible secure access approaches. Zero Trust Network Access architectures provide application-level access without placing users on corporate networks, authenticating users before granting access to specific applications rather than entire networks. Cisco Secure Access by Duo, formerly known as Duo Network Gateway, provides clientless secure access to corporate resources using ZTNA principles without requiring VPN client installation.
Secure Access by Duo operates as a cloud-hosted or on-premises gateway that users access through standard web browsers without installing client software. When users need to access protected applications, they authenticate to Duo using multi-factor authentication verifying user identity and device trust. After successful authentication, Duo establishes secure tunnels between users and protected applications through the gateway. Users access applications through URLs that route through Duo’s infrastructure rather than directly connecting to application servers. The gateway performs authentication, authorization, and encryption enabling users to securely access corporate resources over the Internet without traditional VPN connections. This clientless approach eliminates deployment and support challenges associated with VPN clients while providing granular application-level access control.
The Secure Access implementation provides several security advantages over traditional VPNs. Application-level access grants users access only to specific authorized applications rather than entire corporate networks, implementing least-privilege access and reducing attack surface. Device trust verification ensures users access applications only from trusted managed devices with required security posture preventing unmanaged or compromised devices from accessing corporate resources. Continuous authentication and authorization validate user access throughout sessions rather than just at initial connection enabling dynamic access revocation if security posture changes. Integration with identity providers like Active Directory, Okta, or Azure AD provides centralized user management and single sign-on. Protection for diverse application types includes web applications, SSH servers, RDP sessions, and proprietary applications using TCP-based protocols.
The deployment architecture supports both cloud-hosted and on-premises gateway options. Cloud-hosted gateways provide fastest deployment and automatic scaling without infrastructure management suitable for protecting cloud-hosted applications or providing remote access to on-premises resources. On-premises gateways deploy within corporate data centers suitable for organizations with data sovereignty requirements or latency-sensitive applications. Split architecture combines cloud authentication with on-premises gateways, leveraging cloud-based Duo authentication while keeping application traffic within corporate networks. Administrative controls provide granular policy definition, comprehensive access logging, real-time visibility into application access, and integration with SIEM systems. Organizations should consider Secure Access by Duo for modernizing remote access, implementing zero-trust principles, simplifying client management, and providing secure application access without traditional VPN complexity. The solution addresses challenges of hybrid work environments where users need flexible access from diverse locations and devices while maintaining security.
A) Cisco AnyConnect with SSL VPN provides secure remote access but requires VPN client installation, not clientless access. B) Cisco Secure Access by Duo is the correct answer providing clientless zero-trust network access without traditional VPN clients. C) IPsec Site-to-Site VPN connects networks or sites, not individual remote users, and requires VPN configuration. D) Cisco SD-WAN provides secure connectivity between branch locations and data centers, not remote user access without VPN clients.
Question 158:
What is the purpose of the Cisco Talos Intelligence Group in the security ecosystem?
A) Network equipment manufacturing
B) Threat intelligence research and analysis
C) Technical support services
D) Cloud infrastructure hosting
Answer: B
Explanation:
Effective cyber security requires current intelligence about emerging threats, attack techniques, malicious infrastructure, and adversary tactics. Security products must continuously update with latest threat signatures, indicators of compromise, and protection mechanisms to defend against evolving threats. Maintaining proprietary threat intelligence capabilities requires massive investment in research infrastructure, global telemetry collection, malware analysis systems, and security researchers. Cisco Talos Intelligence Group is one of the largest commercial threat intelligence organizations providing research, analysis, and intelligence that powers protection capabilities across Cisco’s security product portfolio and is shared with the broader security community.
Cisco Talos operates through multiple capabilities that together provide comprehensive threat intelligence. The research team includes security researchers, malware analysts, vulnerability researchers, and data scientists analyzing billions of daily telemetry records from Cisco security products deployed globally. This telemetry includes DNS queries from Umbrella deployments, email samples from Secure Email, endpoint detections from Secure Endpoint, network traffic from firewalls and IPS systems, and web traffic from secure web gateways. The scale of telemetry provides unique visibility into global threat landscape identifying emerging campaigns, new malware families, and changing attacker tactics. Automated analysis systems process this telemetry at scale identifying patterns, correlating related indicators, and extracting actionable intelligence.
The malware analysis capabilities include both automated sandboxing through Secure Malware Analytics and manual reverse engineering by expert malware analysts. When new malware samples are identified, they undergo analysis revealing behavior, communication protocols, persistence mechanisms, and indicators of compromise. This analysis feeds into protection updates delivered to Cisco security products enabling detection and prevention of identified threats. Vulnerability research discovers security flaws in widely deployed software, coordinates responsible disclosure with vendors, and develops IPS signatures protecting against exploitation. The incident response team supports customers during security incidents providing analysis of attacks and recommendations for containment and recovery.
Talos intelligence is integrated throughout Cisco’s security portfolio providing protection updates delivered automatically to products. Umbrella receives domain and IP reputation feeds enabling DNS-layer blocking of malicious destinations. Secure Endpoint receives malware signatures, behavioral indicators, and exploit prevention rules. Firepower IPS receives intrusion signatures and indicators. Secure Email receives spam signatures, phishing indicators, and malware signatures. The open-source community benefits from Talos contributions including Snort IPS rules, ClamAV antivirus signatures, and SpamCop reputation data released publicly enabling non-Cisco products to leverage Talos intelligence. Talos publishes blogs and reports sharing analysis of major threats, campaign insights, and vulnerability details educating the security community. Organizations using Cisco security products benefit from Talos intelligence automatically through product updates, while security teams can leverage published research for threat hunting, incident investigation, and security awareness. The scale and breadth of Talos capabilities represent significant value included with Cisco security products.
A) Network equipment manufacturing is part of Cisco’s business but not the purpose of Talos Intelligence Group. B) Threat intelligence research and analysis is the correct answer describing Talos’s primary purpose in the security ecosystem. C) Technical support services are provided by other Cisco teams, not the focus of Talos intelligence research. D) Cloud infrastructure hosting is provided by cloud service providers, not the purpose of Talos intelligence operations.
Question 159:
An administrator needs to configure Cisco Firepower to block traffic based on user identity. Which prerequisite must be met?
A) Integration with Active Directory or LDAP
B) Installation of AnyConnect on all endpoints
C) Deployment of Umbrella
D) Configuration of SSL decryption
Answer: A
Explanation:
User-based access control implements security policies that grant or deny access based on user identity rather than just source IP addresses or network segments. This approach aligns security policies with organizational roles and responsibilities, supports mobile users who connect from different locations, and enables consistent enforcement regardless of where users are physically located. However, network security devices like firewalls typically operate at the network layer using IP addresses and cannot natively determine which user is generating specific traffic. Integration with identity sources enables firewalls to associate network traffic with user identities and enforce user-based policies.
Cisco Firepower implements user-based access control through integration with identity sources including Microsoft Active Directory, LDAP directories, ISE, and other directory services. The integration enables Firepower to learn which users are authenticated and what IP addresses they are currently using, creating user-to-IP address mappings. These mappings are collected through multiple methods including passive user discovery where Firepower monitors authentication events from domain controllers, terminal servers, and VPN gateways extracting user login information, active authentication where Firepower prompts users for credentials through captive portals before allowing network access, ISE integration where pxGrid communications share user session information from ISE to Firepower, and guest user management where Firepower manages its own guest user database for visitors and contractors.
The user control configuration begins with defining identity sources in Firepower Management Center. For Active Directory integration, administrators provide domain controller addresses, realm information for multi-domain environments, and service account credentials enabling Firepower to query AD. Identity policies define how user-to-IP mappings are collected specifying which interfaces should perform passive discovery, which authentication methods to use, and how long mappings remain valid before requiring reauthentication. Once user identity information is available, administrators configure access control rules that match traffic based on user identities or user groups. Rules can permit or deny traffic, apply different security policies, or route traffic differently based on who is generating the traffic regardless of source IP address.
The benefits of user-based access control are significant for modern environments. Mobile users receive consistent security policies whether connecting from office networks, home networks, or public WiFi because policies follow user identity rather than relying on network location. Logging and reporting include user context providing visibility into which users are generating traffic, accessing restricted resources, or triggering security alerts. Compliance requirements for user accountability are satisfied through user-attributed logs. Bring-your-own-device environments receive appropriate policies based on user identity and entitlements regardless of which device users employ. Organizations should implement identity integration for Firepower when user-based policies are required, ensuring proper service account permissions, considering scalability of user-to-IP mapping methods for large environments, and testing authentication methods to validate that user traffic is correctly attributed. The prerequisite identity source integration must be completed before user-based access control rules will function.
A) Integration with Active Directory or LDAP is the correct answer as it provides the identity source required for user-based access control. B) Installation of AnyConnect on endpoints may assist with user identification but identity source integration is the fundamental prerequisite. C) Deployment of Umbrella provides DNS-layer security but is not required for Firepower user-based access control. D) Configuration of SSL decryption enables inspection of encrypted traffic but is not the prerequisite for user-based access control.
Question 160:
Which command verifies successful RADIUS authentication on a Cisco network device configured for 802.1X?
A) show authentication sessions
B) show ip interface brief
C) show version
D) show spanning-tree
Answer: A
Explanation:
802.1X provides port-based network access control requiring successful authentication before granting network access to connected devices. Network administrators must verify that authentication is functioning correctly, troubleshoot authentication failures, and monitor the status of authenticated sessions. Understanding which commands display authentication status and session information is essential for managing 802.1X deployments and resolving connectivity issues when devices cannot successfully authenticate to the network.
The show authentication sessions command displays detailed information about all authentication sessions on a Cisco switch or network device including devices authenticated through 802.1X, MAC authentication bypass, and web authentication. The output includes crucial information for each authenticated session such as the interface where the device is connected, the MAC address of the authenticated device, the authentication method used to grant access, the authorization state indicating whether access is granted or denied, the VLAN assignment showing which VLAN the device was placed in, and the session timeout values. For 802.1X sessions specifically, the output shows whether the device successfully authenticated using credentials validated through RADIUS, whether the authentication went through ISE or another RADIUS server, and what authorization policies were applied based on the authentication result.
The command provides multiple viewing options for different troubleshooting needs. Running show authentication sessions without parameters displays summary information for all active sessions. Adding an interface identifier like show authentication sessions interface gigabitethernet0/1 displays detailed information only for that specific interface useful when troubleshooting an individual connection. Adding the mac keyword followed by a MAC address displays session information for a specific device regardless of which interface it is connected to. The detailed output includes supplicant information showing the device identity used during authentication, method lists indicating which authentication methods were attempted, and security policy details showing applied dACLs, SGTs, or other authorization attributes.
Additional commands provide complementary authentication information for comprehensive troubleshooting. The show dot1x command displays 802.1X protocol-specific information including authenticator state machines, supplicant status, and protocol timing information. The debug authentication command enables real-time troubleshooting showing authentication attempts as they occur including RADIUS communications, authentication method processing, and authorization application. On ISE, administrators should correlate switch-side information with ISE authentication logs providing the complete picture of authentication flow from supplicant through network device to RADIUS server and back. Common authentication issues revealed through these commands include missing or incorrect RADIUS server configuration preventing authentication attempts from reaching ISE, port configuration issues where 802.1X is not properly enabled, VLAN or ACL assignment failures where authentication succeeds but authorization attributes are not correctly applied, and authentication method mismatches where device and network are configured for different authentication types.
A) show authentication sessions is the correct answer as it displays detailed information about RADIUS authentication and active 802.1X sessions. B) show ip interface brief displays interface status and IP addresses but not authentication session details. C) show version displays device hardware and software information, not authentication sessions. D) show spanning-tree displays Layer 2 spanning tree protocol status, not authentication information.
Question 161:
A network administrator is implementing 802.1X authentication on a Cisco switch to secure network access. Users with company-issued laptops need network access, but legacy devices like printers and IP phones that don’t support 802.1X also need connectivity. What is the recommended solution to accommodate both authenticated users and non-802.1X capable devices?
A) Configure MAB (MAC Authentication Bypass) as a fallback authentication method for devices that fail 802.1X authentication
B) Disable port security completely to allow all devices
C) Create separate VLANs without any authentication
D) Manually configure static MAC addresses in the switch configuration for each device
Answer: A
Explanation:
Network Access Control implementation using 802.1X provides robust authentication for devices that support the protocol, but enterprise networks invariably include devices that cannot perform 802.1X authentication due to lack of supplicant software, embedded operating systems without authentication capabilities, or legacy hardware predating 802.1X standards. Printers, IP phones, cameras, building automation systems, and medical devices commonly fall into this category. Organizations need authentication strategies that provide strong security for capable devices while accommodating legitimate non-capable devices without creating security gaps or operational problems.
MAC Authentication Bypass provides an authentication fallback mechanism specifically designed for this scenario. When MAB is configured on a switch port along with 802.1X, the switch first attempts 802.1X authentication by sending EAP requests to connected devices. Devices with 802.1X supplicants respond and proceed through normal 802.1X authentication. Devices without supplicants do not respond to EAP requests. After a configurable timeout period without receiving 802.1X responses, the switch automatically falls back to MAB, using the device’s MAC address as the authentication credential.
The MAB authentication process involves the switch detecting a device’s MAC address from the first packet received on the port, packaging the MAC address as a username and password in a RADIUS authentication request, sending the request to the authentication server which is typically Cisco ISE or another RADIUS server, the authentication server checking whether the MAC address is authorized based on configured policies or database entries, and the server returning authentication success or failure with associated authorization attributes. Successful MAB authentication results in the device being granted network access according to the authorization policy, which might place it in a specific VLAN, apply access control lists, or enforce other policies.
The authentication order configuration is critical for proper operation. The standard configuration uses authentication order dot1x mab on switch ports, instructing the switch to try 802.1X first and fall back to MAB if 802.1X fails or times out. This ordering ensures that capable devices use the stronger 802.1X authentication while non-capable devices still receive connectivity through MAB. Alternative orderings exist for specific scenarios, but dot1x-first ordering is most common because it prioritizes the stronger authentication method.
Authorization policies on the authentication server differentiate between 802.1X authenticated users and MAB authenticated devices, applying appropriate access controls for each. User accounts authenticated via 802.1X might receive full network access or access based on their role and group memberships. Device MAC addresses authenticated via MAB might receive restricted access appropriate for printers or phones, such as VLAN assignment to a printer network with access only to print servers, or voice VLAN assignment for IP phones with quality of service configurations. This differentiated authorization ensures devices receive appropriate access without excessive privileges.
MAC address management becomes important when using MAB because the authentication server must know which MAC addresses to authorize. Organizations can pre-populate authentication servers with known device MAC addresses, implement registration workflows where devices are authenticated after admin approval, use profiling to automatically identify device types and apply appropriate policies, or combine approaches based on device types and operational requirements. ISE provides sophisticated profiling capabilities that examine device behavior and characteristics to automatically classify devices even without pre-registration.
Security considerations for MAB acknowledge that MAC addresses provide weaker authentication than 802.1X because MAC addresses can be observed on the network and spoofed by attackers. MAB should be combined with additional security measures including restricting MAB-authenticated devices to limited network segments with minimal privileges, implementing dynamic VLAN assignment to isolate MAB devices from sensitive resources, using profiling to verify device behavior matches its claimed type, monitoring for anomalous behavior from MAB-authenticated devices, and maintaining strict inventory of authorized MAC addresses. MAB provides practical accommodation for legacy devices while these complementary controls mitigate the authentication weaknesses.
The complete configuration involves enabling 802.1X globally on the switch, configuring switch ports for 802.1X with authentication order dot1x mab, configuring authentication server addresses typically RADIUS servers like ISE, setting authentication timeout values that balance responsiveness with allowing sufficient time for 802.1X negotiation, configuring authorization policies on the authentication server for both 802.1X users and MAB devices, and testing with both 802.1X capable devices and non-capable devices to verify proper authentication fallback and authorization. Proper testing ensures both device types receive appropriate access.
A) This is the correct answer because configuring MAB as a fallback authentication method provides a standards-based, secure approach to accommodate non-802.1X capable devices while maintaining strong authentication for capable devices, with centralized policy management through the authentication server.
B) Disabling port security completely eliminates network access control and creates significant security vulnerabilities. Any device could connect to any switch port without authentication or authorization, allowing unauthorized devices, rogue devices, and attackers to gain network access. Port security and 802.1X serve different but complementary purposes, and disabling security features to accommodate legacy devices sacrifices security for convenience. The proper approach is configuring authentication methods that accommodate different device capabilities while maintaining access control.
C) Creating separate VLANs without authentication provides network segmentation but no access control to prevent unauthorized devices from connecting. Anyone could plug into ports on the legacy device VLAN and gain network access without authentication. While VLAN segmentation is part of the solution for isolating legacy devices, it must be combined with authentication to ensure only authorized devices connect. VLANs alone do not provide access control at the port level.
D) Manually configuring static MAC addresses in switch configuration for each device does not provide authentication and creates enormous administrative burden. This approach requires updating switch configurations every time a device is added, removed, or replaced, involves touching multiple switches when changes occur, provides no centralized policy management, and does not integrate with identity services. Static MAC configurations also provide no actual authentication because they merely define allowed addresses without verifying device identity. MAB with centralized authentication servers provides much better manageability and security.
Question 162:
An organization is deploying Cisco Firepower NGFW and needs to configure security policies that inspect encrypted HTTPS traffic for malware and threats. What must be implemented to enable inspection of encrypted traffic?
A) SSL/TLS decryption policy with appropriate certificate configuration to decrypt, inspect, and re-encrypt traffic
B) Inspect encrypted traffic without decryption using packet headers only
C) Block all HTTPS traffic to avoid encrypted threats
D) Disable all security inspection for encrypted protocols
Answer: A
Explanation:
The widespread adoption of encryption for web traffic through HTTPS presents a significant challenge for network security because encryption protects not only legitimate user privacy but also conceals malicious content from security inspection. Modern estimates suggest over 90 percent of web traffic uses HTTPS encryption, and attackers increasingly leverage encryption to hide command and control communications, malware downloads, and data exfiltration. Without decryption capabilities, next-generation firewalls and intrusion prevention systems become blind to the majority of traffic, creating enormous security gaps despite sophisticated threat detection technologies.
SSL/TLS decryption, also called SSL inspection or HTTPS inspection, addresses this challenge by acting as a trusted man-in-the-middle that terminates encrypted connections from clients, inspects the decrypted content, and establishes new encrypted connections to destination servers. This process enables applying all security inspection capabilities including malware detection, intrusion prevention, data loss prevention, application control, and URL filtering to encrypted traffic. Without decryption, these security controls can only examine connection metadata like IP addresses and domain names from SNI, missing threats hidden in encrypted payloads.
The decryption process involves several technical components and steps. When a client initiates an HTTPS connection, the firewall intercepts the connection and presents a firewall-generated certificate to the client instead of the actual server certificate. The client establishes an encrypted session with the firewall using this certificate. Simultaneously, the firewall establishes a separate encrypted connection to the actual destination server. The firewall decrypts traffic from the client, inspects the plaintext content using configured security policies, and re-encrypts the traffic before forwarding to the destination server. Return traffic undergoes the same decrypt-inspect-encrypt process in the opposite direction.
Certificate trust is critical for successful SSL decryption because clients must trust the firewall-generated certificates to avoid browser warnings and connection failures. Organizations deploy a firewall root certificate to all managed clients through group policy, mobile device management, or other enterprise certificate distribution mechanisms. When the firewall generates certificates for specific sites, these certificates chain to the trusted root, causing clients to accept them without warnings. Proper certificate management ensures transparent decryption for users while maintaining the ability to inspect traffic.
Decryption policy configuration determines which traffic is decrypted and which is excluded from decryption. Organizations commonly exclude certain categories from decryption including financial sites to protect sensitive transaction data, healthcare sites to maintain HIPAA compliance, sites with certificate pinning that will fail if intercepted, and government or legal sites where interception might violate regulations. Decryption policies use URL categories, specific domains, or IP addresses to define exclusions. The balance between security inspection and privacy considerations varies by organization and jurisdiction.
Performance implications of SSL decryption are significant because cryptographic operations are computationally expensive. Decrypting and re-encrypting all traffic requires substantial processing power, and inadequate capacity results in degraded throughput and increased latency affecting user experience. Firepower platforms include hardware cryptographic acceleration to improve decryption performance, but capacity planning must account for decryption overhead. Organizations should size firewall platforms based on encrypted throughput requirements rather than just cleartext throughput, as decryption typically reduces achievable throughput substantially.
Privacy and legal considerations vary by jurisdiction and organizational policies. Some jurisdictions restrict or prohibit SSL inspection under privacy laws, some industries have regulatory requirements that limit inspection of certain traffic types, and organizations must communicate inspection practices to users and address concerns about privacy. Legal counsel should review SSL inspection implementations to ensure compliance with applicable laws and regulations. Technical capabilities must be balanced with legal and ethical obligations regarding user privacy.
Visibility into decryption operations through logging and monitoring helps administrators understand what traffic is being decrypted, excluded, or causing issues. Logs show decryption successes and failures, certificate validation issues, and statistics on decrypted traffic volumes. Monitoring these metrics helps identify misconfigurations, capacity issues, and sites requiring decryption exclusions. Regular review ensures decryption operates effectively while identifying any problems requiring attention.
A) This is the correct answer because SSL/TLS decryption policy with appropriate certificate configuration provides the necessary capability to decrypt encrypted traffic, apply comprehensive security inspection, and re-encrypt traffic transparently, enabling threat detection in encrypted communications.
B) Inspecting encrypted traffic without decryption using only packet headers provides minimal security value because headers reveal only IP addresses, port numbers, and limited metadata like SNI domain names. The actual payload content where malware, exploits, and malicious commands reside remains encrypted and unexamined. Sophisticated threats easily evade inspection limited to headers by using HTTPS to hide malicious activity. While some security value exists in metadata analysis, comprehensive threat detection requires inspecting actual content, which demands decryption.
C) Blocking all HTTPS traffic eliminates access to the vast majority of legitimate web resources including business applications, cloud services, vendor portals, and research resources. Modern business operations fundamentally depend on HTTPS access, making blanket blocking completely impractical. The solution to encrypted threats is inspection through decryption, not blocking encrypted protocols entirely. Organizations need HTTPS access for legitimate business while maintaining security through appropriate inspection.
D) Disabling all security inspection for encrypted protocols creates massive security blind spots allowing threats to pass undetected through the firewall. With over 90 percent of web traffic encrypted, disabling inspection for encrypted protocols effectively disables security for most traffic. Attackers specifically use encryption to evade security controls, and failing to inspect encrypted traffic hands attackers an easy bypass mechanism. Security inspection must extend to encrypted traffic through decryption to maintain effective threat prevention.
Question 163:
A security engineer needs to implement network segmentation using Cisco TrustSec to dynamically assign security group tags to users and devices for policy enforcement. Which Cisco product serves as the primary policy administration point for TrustSec deployment?
A) Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) for centralized TrustSec policy definition and SGT assignment
B) Individual switch CLI configuration for each device manually
C) DHCP server for assigning tags with IP addresses
D) DNS server for tag resolution
Answer: A
Explanation:
Cisco TrustSec represents a software-defined segmentation approach that abstracts security policy from network topology by using Security Group Tags that classify users, devices, and resources into logical groups based on identity rather than IP addresses or VLAN assignments. This identity-based approach enables consistent security policy enforcement across the network regardless of where users or devices connect, simplifying policy management compared to traditional VLAN and ACL approaches that tightly couple policy to topology. TrustSec provides scalable, dynamic segmentation that adapts automatically as users and devices move within the network.
Cisco Identity Services Engine serves as the policy administration point and central management platform for TrustSec deployments. ISE defines security groups which are logical classifications like Employees, Contractors, Executives, PCI_Servers, or Medical_Devices, assigns Security Group Tags to these groups as numerical identifiers that network devices use for policy enforcement, defines Security Group Access Control Lists that specify what communications are allowed between security groups, and distributes these policies to network infrastructure devices that enforce them. ISE’s centralized role ensures consistent policy across the network and simplifies management compared to configuring policies individually on each network device.
Security Group Tag assignment occurs during authentication when users or devices connect to the network. ISE evaluates identity information including username, device type, location, posture assessment results, and other attributes to determine the appropriate security group membership. ISE then assigns the corresponding SGT to the authenticated session and communicates this assignment to the network access device through RADIUS attributes. The access device tags packets from that session with the SGT as they enter the network, enabling downstream devices to enforce policy based on the tag without repeating authentication or policy lookups.
Security Group ACL definition in ISE creates a matrix of allowed communications between security groups. Administrators define policies like «Employees can access Internet but not PCI Servers» or «Contractors can access Guest WiFi only» by creating SGACL entries. These policies express business intent using group names rather than network addresses, making them intuitive and easier to maintain. ISE translates these policies into enforceable ACLs that network devices apply based on source and destination SGTs. The matrix approach scales efficiently because policies are defined once between groups rather than repeatedly for each individual user or device.
Policy enforcement occurs on TrustSec-capable network devices including switches, routers, firewalls, and wireless controllers that examine SGTs on packets and enforce SGACLs. When a packet with source SGT traverses a network device, the device looks up the appropriate SGACL based on the source and destination SGTs and applies the policy to permit or deny the traffic. This distributed enforcement scales effectively because policy decisions occur at the network edge and distribution layer rather than concentrating all traffic through central enforcement points. Devices cache SGACLs received from ISE to enable high-performance enforcement.
TrustSec architecture separates classification at the network edge from enforcement throughout the network. SGT assignment happens once during authentication at the access layer, and the tag travels with packets as they traverse the network. Distribution and core layers enforce policy based on tags without needing to re-classify traffic or perform deep packet inspection. This separation of duties optimizes performance because classification is computationally expensive but occurs only once, while enforcement using pre-assigned tags is efficient and scales to line rate throughout the network.
Integration with other identity and security systems enhances TrustSec capabilities. ISE can receive endpoint classification information from AnyConnect posture assessment, device profiling, vulnerability scanners, and threat intelligence feeds to make more informed SGT assignment decisions. TrustSec policies can be exported to firewalls and cloud security platforms to extend consistent segmentation beyond the campus network. This integration creates a cohesive security architecture where identity and context from multiple sources inform access decisions.
Migration from traditional segmentation to TrustSec can occur gradually with coexistence of TrustSec and traditional approaches. Organizations can begin by deploying TrustSec in monitor mode to observe traffic patterns, incrementally enable enforcement for specific security groups or network areas, maintain traditional VLANs and ACLs during transition, and eventually retire legacy approaches as TrustSec coverage becomes comprehensive. This incremental adoption reduces risk and allows organizations to gain experience with TrustSec before full commitment.
A) This is the correct answer because Cisco ISE serves as the centralized policy administration point for TrustSec deployments, providing security group definition, SGT assignment, SGACL policy definition, and policy distribution to enforcement points throughout the network.
B) Individual switch CLI configuration for each device manually defeats the entire purpose of TrustSec’s centralized policy management and dynamic segmentation. Manual per-device configuration is exactly what TrustSec aims to eliminate by abstracting policy from topology and centralizing management in ISE. Configuring TrustSec policies individually on each switch would be operationally impractical in networks of any significant size and would lose the benefits of centralized policy definition and dynamic tag assignment. TrustSec requires centralized policy administration through ISE.
C) DHCP servers assign IP addresses and network configuration parameters but have no role in TrustSec SGT assignment or policy definition. DHCP operates at a different layer and serves different purposes than TrustSec’s identity-based segmentation. While DHCP and TrustSec may coexist in the same network, DHCP does not provide authentication, identity evaluation, or policy enforcement capabilities that TrustSec requires. This represents confusion about different network services and their functions.
D) DNS servers resolve hostnames to IP addresses but have no relationship to TrustSec SGT assignment or policy enforcement. DNS is a name resolution service unrelated to identity-based segmentation. TrustSec uses authentication, authorization, and identity services provided by ISE, not name resolution services from DNS. This option represents fundamental misunderstanding of both DNS and TrustSec purposes and architectures.
Question 164:
An organization is implementing Cisco AMP (Advanced Malware Protection) for Endpoints and needs to understand how it provides protection. What is the primary advantage of AMP’s retrospective security capability?
A) Continuous analysis and automatic response to files even after initial execution if they are later determined to be malicious
B) Only scanning files at download time without ongoing monitoring
C) Requiring manual updates for every new threat
D) Protecting only against known malware signatures
Answer: A
Explanation:
Traditional antivirus solutions operate with a point-in-time security model where files are scanned at the moment they are downloaded or accessed, and if they pass inspection at that moment, they are considered safe with no further scrutiny. This approach fails against sophisticated threats where malware initially appears benign to evade detection, or where threat intelligence about a file’s malicious nature only becomes available after the file has already entered the environment. The rapidly evolving threat landscape with new malware variants emerging constantly makes point-in-time detection insufficient for comprehensive endpoint protection.
Cisco AMP for Endpoints provides continuous monitoring and retrospective security that tracks files from initial appearance through their complete lifecycle within the environment. When a file first appears, AMP performs initial disposition checks against cloud threat intelligence using file hashes, performs behavioral analysis if disposition is unknown, and allows or blocks the file based on policies. However, the critical differentiator is that AMP continues tracking the file indefinitely, maintaining records of which endpoints have seen or executed the file and continuously re-evaluating the file’s disposition as new threat intelligence becomes available globally.
Retrospective security operates through continuous cloud queries where AMP agents maintain records of all files seen on protected endpoints, periodically query the AMP cloud about file dispositions, and receive notifications when previously benign files are newly classified as malicious. These disposition changes occur as Cisco’s threat research teams and global telemetry identify new threats, as sandbox analysis completes for previously unknown files, or as behavioral indicators reveal malicious intent that was not apparent initially. The cloud-based intelligence aggregates data from millions of endpoints worldwide to rapidly identify emerging threats.
Automatic response capabilities enable AMP to take action when retrospective analysis identifies threats. If a file’s disposition changes from clean to malicious, AMP automatically notifies affected endpoints, can automatically quarantine the malicious file on all systems where it exists, terminates running processes associated with the malware, provides detailed forensics about file prevalence and behaviors, and creates alerts for security teams to investigate incidents. This automatic response contains threats quickly without requiring manual intervention or waiting for security teams to discover infections through other means.
The trajectory feature in AMP provides comprehensive forensics showing a file’s complete history including where it first appeared in the network, which endpoints copied or executed it, what other files it created or modified, what network connections it established, and what processes or behaviors it exhibited. This trajectory information is invaluable for incident response because it shows the full scope of compromise, identifies patient zero and subsequent spread, reveals what data may have been accessed or exfiltrated, and informs remediation by showing all affected systems. Traditional point-in-time antivirus provides none of this contextual intelligence.
Cloud-based architecture enables AMP to leverage collective intelligence from Cisco’s global customer base where threat intelligence from millions of endpoints is aggregated and analyzed, new threats detected anywhere are identified and blocked everywhere within minutes, no signature updates are required on endpoints because disposition checks occur in the cloud, and behavioral analysis uses vast computational resources unavailable to individual endpoints. This cloud-native approach provides faster, more comprehensive protection than signature-based solutions limited to locally stored definitions.
Integration with other Cisco security products creates coordinated threat response where AMP shares threat intelligence with network security devices, firewalls can block network traffic associated with AMP-identified threats, ISE can quarantine infected endpoints by changing network access, and email security can block messages containing malicious attachments. This Security Fabric integration enables organization-wide threat response that extends beyond just endpoint protection to encompass the entire security infrastructure.
Use cases that highlight retrospective security value include zero-day malware that initially evades detection but is later identified through behavioral analysis or global telemetry, targeted attacks using custom malware with no initial signatures where retrospective analysis identifies malicious behaviors days or weeks after initial execution, supply chain attacks where trusted software is later compromised and AMP identifies the compromise across all installations, and advanced persistent threats where attackers use multiple stages and retrospective analysis connects activities occurring across extended timeframes. Traditional antivirus fails in all these scenarios where threats are not immediately identifiable.
A) This is the correct answer because retrospective security’s continuous analysis and automatic response to files even after initial execution provides protection against sophisticated threats that evade point-in-time detection, leveraging cloud-based global intelligence to identify and remediate threats across all affected endpoints automatically.
B) Scanning files only at download time without ongoing monitoring represents traditional antivirus approaches that AMP specifically improves upon through retrospective security. Point-in-time scanning misses threats that appear benign initially or where threat intelligence only becomes available later. The fundamental advantage of AMP is moving beyond this limited approach to provide continuous monitoring and retrospective analysis that catches threats traditional antivirus misses. This option describes what AMP is not, not what it is.
C) Requiring manual updates for every new threat represents outdated signature-based antivirus models that AMP’s cloud-based architecture eliminates. AMP endpoints do not need signature updates because disposition checks occur in the cloud with real-time access to the latest threat intelligence. The cloud automatically incorporates new threat information as soon as it is identified globally without waiting for update distribution. This automatic cloud-based intelligence is one of AMP’s key advantages over traditional signature-based approaches.
D) Protecting only against known malware signatures severely limits effectiveness because sophisticated threats use techniques specifically designed to evade signature detection including polymorphism, encryption, and zero-day exploits. AMP goes far beyond simple signature matching to include behavioral analysis, machine learning, sandboxing, and retrospective analysis that identify threats based on behaviors and indicators beyond static signatures. Signature-based detection is one component but not the primary capability or advantage of AMP’s comprehensive approach.
Question 165:
A network security team is implementing Cisco Umbrella for DNS-layer security. What is the primary benefit of enforcing security at the DNS layer compared to traditional IP or URL filtering?
A) Blocking threats before connections are established by preventing DNS resolution for malicious domains, providing protection across all ports and protocols
B) Only protecting web browsing on port 80 and 443
C) Requiring agents on every device without cloud-based protection
D) Protecting only internal network resources without internet coverage
Answer: A
Explanation:
DNS-layer security represents a fundamentally different approach to threat prevention compared to traditional firewall, proxy, or web filtering technologies that operate at the network or application layers. Every internet connection begins with a DNS query to resolve hostnames to IP addresses, and this universal first step provides a strategic enforcement point that occurs before any connection is established to potentially malicious destinations. By preventing DNS resolution for malicious domains, DNS-layer security blocks threats at the earliest possible stage before any data exchange occurs regardless of port, protocol, or application involved.
Cisco Umbrella operates as a cloud-delivered security service that intercepts DNS queries from protected endpoints or networks, analyzes requested domains against extensive threat intelligence, allows or blocks DNS resolution based on security policies and threat classifications, and logs all DNS activity for visibility and analytics. When Umbrella blocks a malicious domain, the DNS query receives a response directing the client to a block page or returns NXDOMAIN, preventing the client from ever obtaining the IP address needed to contact the malicious server. This prevention at DNS layer stops threats before connections start.
The universal coverage advantage of DNS-layer security stems from DNS being fundamental to all internet communications. Web browsing, email, file transfers, API calls, IoT device communications, and virtually every other internet activity require DNS resolution. Traditional web proxies only see HTTP and HTTPS traffic, firewalls only see traffic that traverses the firewall, and endpoint agents only protect devices where they are installed. DNS-layer security sees and can control all outbound connection attempts regardless of application, port, or protocol because all require DNS resolution.
Protection across all ports and protocols addresses a critical gap in traditional security approaches. Malware command and control channels may use unusual ports, custom protocols, or direct IP connections to evade web proxies. DNS-layer security blocks these evasion techniques because even connections to unusual ports must first resolve hostnames. Attackers using domain generation algorithms to create constantly changing malicious domains cannot evade DNS-layer security because Umbrella’s machine learning identifies algorithmically generated domains even when they are completely new and have no reputation history.
Roaming user protection without VPN requirements is a major operational advantage of cloud-based DNS-layer security. Traditional corporate security relies on users connecting through VPN to route traffic through corporate security infrastructure. This approach degrades performance, creates user friction that reduces VPN usage, and leaves users unprotected when they work outside VPN. Umbrella protects users everywhere because the lightweight agent or mobile device configuration redirects DNS queries to Umbrella regardless of network location. Users receive consistent protection at home, in coffee shops, or traveling without VPN connectivity requirements.
Integration with threat intelligence from multiple sources enhances Umbrella’s effectiveness. Cisco aggregates threat data from Talos security research, millions of Umbrella users globally providing telemetry about domain requests, partnerships with security vendors sharing threat indicators, honeypots and sinkholes observing attacker infrastructure, and machine learning models analyzing domain characteristics. This diverse intelligence identifies threats faster and more comprehensively than any single source, providing proactive protection even against newly created malicious infrastructure.
Visibility and analytics from DNS query logs provide security teams with valuable intelligence about network activity. DNS logs reveal what internet resources users and devices access, identify shadow IT services being used without approval, detect compromised endpoints communicating with command and control infrastructure, show data exfiltration attempts to suspicious domains, and provide forensics for incident investigation. This visibility exists even for encrypted traffic where HTTPS prevents seeing URLs or content because DNS queries occur before encryption and reveal destination domains.
Deployment flexibility accommodates various architectures and use cases. Organizations can deploy Umbrella through lightweight agents on endpoints for comprehensive roaming protection, network devices redirecting DNS queries to Umbrella for on-premises protection without endpoint software, integration with SD-WAN or security service edge for branch office protection, and API integration with security orchestration platforms for automated threat response. Multiple deployment options enable protecting diverse environments with appropriate methods for each use case.
Policy enforcement capabilities enable granular control where administrators define categories to block or allow such as malware, phishing, adult content, or business productivity, custom domain lists for organization-specific requirements, time-based policies for different access during work hours versus off hours, user and group-based policies applying different restrictions to different populations, and exception handling for legitimate domains incorrectly categorized. Flexible policies balance security with business requirements ensuring protection does not impede legitimate activities.
A) This is the correct answer because DNS-layer security blocks threats before connections are established by preventing DNS resolution for malicious domains, providing protection that works across all ports, protocols, and applications since everything using domain names requires DNS resolution.
B) Limiting protection to only web browsing on ports 80 and 443 describes traditional web proxy or web filtering limitations that DNS-layer security specifically overcomes. DNS-layer security protects all internet communications regardless of port or protocol because DNS resolution is required universally. Malware using non-web protocols, command and control on unusual ports, and other evasion techniques that bypass web-only security still require DNS and are therefore protected by DNS-layer security. This option describes what DNS-layer security is not.
C) Requiring agents on every device without cloud-based protection reverses Umbrella’s actual architecture. Umbrella is fundamentally a cloud-delivered service where the heavy analysis occurs in the cloud, not on endpoints. While agents provide one deployment option, Umbrella also protects through network appliances redirecting DNS queries and mobile device profiles without agents. The cloud-based architecture is precisely what enables rapid updates, machine learning at scale, and protection everywhere without maintaining on-premises infrastructure. This represents backwards understanding of Umbrella’s architecture.
D) Protecting only internal network resources without internet coverage completely misunderstands DNS-layer security’s purpose and capabilities. Umbrella specifically provides internet security by analyzing and filtering DNS queries for external domains. Internal DNS for local resources typically bypasses Umbrella and resolves through internal DNS servers. The entire value proposition of DNS-layer security is protecting against internet-based threats by controlling external DNS resolution. Internal-only protection would not address the primary threat vector of internet-based attacks and malware.