Fortinet NSE4_FGT_AD-7.6 Exam With Confidence Using Practice Dumps

In FortiOS 7.6 Application Control, security logs are generated primarily for actions such as Block or Monitor, not for Allow actions.

What is happening in the exhibit

An Application Override is configured for ABC.Com

Type: Application

Action: Allow

The application control profile is applied to a firewall policy

Logging is enabled on the firewall policy

Traffic to ABC.Com is successfully allowed

However, no security logs appear for ABC.Com.

Why no logs are generated

In FortiOS 7.6:

Application Control logs are written to Security Logs when:

An application is Blocked

An application is Monitored

When an application action is set to Allow:

The traffic is permitted silently

No application control security log is generated

Even if policy logging is enabled

This is expected and documented behavior.

To generate logs for allowed applications, the action must be set to Monitor, not Allow.

Why the other options are incorrect

A. ABC.Com is hitting the category Excessive-BandwidthIncorrect. ABC.Com has a higher-priority explicit override (priority 1), so it is not evaluated against the Excessive-Bandwidth filter.

B. The ABC.Com Type is set as Application instead of FilterIncorrect. Application-type overrides are valid and commonly used; this does not suppress logging.

C. The ABC.Com must be configured as a web filter profileIncorrect. This traffic is being evaluated by Application Control, not Web Filter.

From the exhibits:

The Web Filter profile is configured with Feature set = Flow-based.

The Firewall policy is configured with Inspection mode = Proxy-based and has Web Filter enabled.

In FortiOS 7.6, security profiles that have a feature set selection (Flow-based vs Proxy-based) must match the inspection mode used by the firewall policy. If the profile’s feature set does not match the policy’s inspection mode, the profile behavior will not align with what the administrator expects (and in many cases FortiOS will prevent correct use/selection, or the feature behavior will not apply as intended).

That mismatch explains why the configured URL filter entry for (set to Monitor) is not producing the expected result, and instead the session is being evaluated by category rating and blocked (shown as Malicious Websites on the FortiGuard block page).

Why the other options are not the best fit:

A: A web rating override is not shown in the exhibits, and nothing indicates an override misconfiguration.

C: While the policy inspection mode could be changed, the root cause shown is the profile feature set mismatch (profile is Flow-based).

D: The URL filter action shown is Monitor, which would not produce a block page by itself.

According to the FortiOS 7.6 Administrator Study Guide, the Application Control engine processes traffic by evaluating the Application and Filter Overrides section first, using a top-down matching logic similar to firewall policies. In the provided exhibit, there are two override entries:

Priority 1 : A behavior-based filter for Excessive-Bandwidth with the action set to Block .

Priority 2 : A vendor-based filter for Apple with the action set to Monitor .

The exhibit titled " Application override configuration " explicitly shows that Apple FaceTime is one of the signatures included within the Excessive-Bandwidth behavior filter. When the FortiGate inspects FaceTime traffic, it matches the first entry (Priority 1) because the signature belongs to the " Excessive-Bandwidth " group. Since the action for this priority is Block , the traffic is dropped immediately.

The phrase " only a few calls " is a common exam distractor; in this context, the " Excessive-Bandwidth " filter refers to the classification of the application (as one that typically consumes high bandwidth) rather than a real-time measurement of the specific session ' s throughput. Because the engine stops searching once a match is found in the overrides, it never reaches the Priority 2 " Monitor " rule or the general Category settings.