Free and Premium Fortinet FCSS_NST_SE-7.6 Dumps Questions Answers

The BGP debug output shows session information for peers, including state details. According to official Fortinet BGP documentation, if the session state with a peer does not show "Idle," "Active," or "Connect," but instead shows "Established," "Up," or related counters (e.g., messages sent/received or uptime), it indicates the session is operational. In this scenario, the peer 10.127.0.75 is the only one showing a positive indication of a live, established session. Other options like neighbor-range configuration, AS mismatch, or route-maps blocking prefixes are not supported by evidence provided in a simple BGP session state debug, nor does the output show errors relating to local or remote AS issues.

The correct interpretation comes from Fortinet's BGP troubleshooting guide, which outlines how to read session status and neighbor states in debug and summary outputs.

The debug flow message iprope_in_check() check failed, drop specifically indicates a failure in the Local-In Policy check. The "iprope" (IP ROouting Policy Enforcement) engine handles policy lookups. The _in_check suffix confirms that the decision is regarding traffic destined to the FortiGate itself (Local-In traffic), rather than traffic passing through it.

D. The packet was dropped because the requested service is not enabled on FortiGate:

This is the most common cause. When a packet arrives destined for the FortiGate's interface IP (e.g., an HTTPS or SSH request), the kernel checks if that specific service is enabled in the interface settings (set allowaccess). If the service is not enabled (e.g., trying to Ping an interface where PING access is disabled), the iprope_in_check function fails and drops the packet immediately.

C. The packet was dropped because the trusted host list is misconfigured:

Even if the service (e.g., HTTPS) is enabled on the interface, the FortiGate checks the Administrator settings. If Trusted Hosts are configured, the source IP of the incoming packet is compared against the allowed list. If the IP is not on the list, the Local-In policy check (iprope_in_check) fails, and the packet is dropped to secure the management plane.

Why other options are incorrect:

A: If traffic is dropped by a standard Firewall Policy (traffic passing through the device from one interface to another), the debug message will typically state denied by policy x or no matching policy. It would generally be a forward check (iprope_fwd_check or similar), not an _in_check.

B: If there is no route to the source, the error is a Reverse Path Forwarding (RPF) failure. The debug flow logs this explicitly as reverse path check fail, drop.

Auxiliary sessions in Fortinet are designed to support ECMP (Equal Cost Multi-Path) and SD-WAN scenarios, allowing sessions to be handled efficiently when traffic needs to be dynamically distributed across multiple links. With the auxiliary session setting enabled, FortiGate creates additional session table entries for each possible path in ECMP or SD-WAN—meaning that if the routing path changes (such as a link failover), a new session can be immediately activated and offloaded to the NP6 network processor for acceleration, ensuring minimal disruption. This greatly benefits high-throughput deployments.

Official documentation specifies that when auxiliary sessions are enabled, FortiGate doesn’t just rely on dynamically creating new sessions after a routing event, it proactively creates sessions for all potential paths. This means that in the event of a route change, two sessions exist and the traffic is quickly re-routed and offloaded, maximizing performance and reliability. Without this feature, multiple paths cannot be efficiently offloaded, and routing changes trigger a single session update, reducing failover performance.

When FortiGate performs SSL certificate inspection with default settings, it checks if the Server Name Indication (SNI) matches either the Common Name (CN) or any Subject Alternative Name (SAN) in the server certificate. If there is no match, FortiGate does not block the connection; instead, it uses the CN value from the certificate's subject field to continue web filtering and categorization.

This behavior is described in the official Fortinet 7.6.4 Administration Guide:

“Check the SNI in the hello message with the CN or SAN field in the returned server certificate: Enable: If it is mismatched, use the CN in the server certificate.” This is the default (Enable) mode, which differs from the Strict mode that would block the mismatched connection.

By default, this policy ensures service continuity and prevents disruptions due to certificate mismatches, allowing FortiGate to log and inspect based on the CN even when the requested SNI does not match. It provides a balance between connection reliability and the accuracy of filtering by certificate identity, allowing security policies to remain functional without unnecessary blocks. This approach is recommended by Fortinet to maintain usability for end-users while still supporting granular inspection.

The get router info bgp summary output lists BGP neighbor status:

Prefix Reception: The "State/PfxRcd" column shows the number of prefixes received from the neighbor—neighbor 100.64.1.254 has "1", confirming option A.

Received Message Count: Under "MsgRcvd", 18 packets have been received from neighbor 100.64.1.254. This matches option C.

The second neighbor 100.64.2.254 is in "Active" state and has received/sent 0 packets, indicating that its TCP connection is NOT established, disproving option B.

There is no indication anywhere that the router is "still calculating" prefixes; "Active" just means no session is established, so option D is incorrect.

To determine the correct reasons for the adjacency failure, we must analyze the standard OSPF real-time debug output (diagnose ip router ospf all enable or diagnose sniffer packet) typically provided in this exam exhibit.

Analyze the Debug Output:

The debug output in this specific question scenario typically displays an incoming Hello packet line: OSPF: RECV[Hello]: ... auth-type 0 ...

"RECV": Indicates the packet is coming from the Remote peer.

"auth-type 0": Indicates the Remote peer is sending "Null" (No) authentication.

Analyze the Failure:

The adjacency fails because the Local FortiGate is rejecting this packet.

If the Local FortiGate accepts "No Authentication", it would match auth-type 0 and form the adjacency.

Since it is failing (and producing a debug log), the Local FortiGate must be expecting a different authentication type (Type 1 Cleartext or Type 2 MD5).

Evaluate the Options:

A. The remote peer has either OSPF cleartext or MD5 authentication configured.

Incorrect. The debug shows auth-type 0 (No Auth) coming from the remote peer.

B. There is an OSPF authentication configuration mismatch.

Correct. One side is sending "No Auth" (Remote), and the other expects "Auth" (Local). This is a definition of a mismatch.

C. The local FortiGate does not have OSPF authentication configured.

Incorrect. If the Local unit had "No Auth" configured, it would match the Remote's auth-type 0, and the adjacency would come up. The failure implies the Local unit does have auth configured.

D. The local FortiGate has either OSPF cleartext or MD5 authentication configured.

Correct. Because the Local unit is rejecting the "No Auth" packet from the remote peer, it confirms that the Local unit has authentication enabled (expecting Type 1 or 2).

Conclusion: The breakdown of the OSPF negotiation shows that the Remote peer is sending no authentication (Type 0), while the Local FortiGate expects authentication, resulting in a mismatch.

The 8.8.8.8/32 route is visible in the OSPF database on FGT-B but not installed into the routing table—the most likely explanation is that FGT-B is filtering it from being installed.

The reported symptom—users unable to access any websites despite no explicit blocks in the profile—points to systemic connectivity or configuration issues rather than specific URL filtering rules.

Option B (SSL/TLS Inspection): When Deep Inspection is enabled, the FortiGate acts as a Man-in-the-Middle (MitM) and re-signs server certificates using its own CA. If the clients (browsers) do not trust this CA (i.e., the certificate is not installed in their Trusted Root store), they will reject the connection with certificate errors, effectively preventing access to all HTTPS websites.

Option D (DNS): Web browsing relies on DNS resolution. If the configured DNS server is unreachable or failing, the FortiGate (or the client) cannot resolve FQDNs to IP addresses. Consequently, browsers will fail to load any page, resulting in a total loss of web access.

Option E (License): If the FortiGuard Web Filtering license expires, the FortiGate can no longer query the FortiGuard Distribution Network (FDN) for ratings. By default, or if the allow-when-rating-error setting is disabled (a common security practice), the FortiGate will block all web traffic that it cannot rate, often displaying a "Web Filter Service Error" or invalid license page.

Option A is incorrect because clearing the cache only increases latency, it does not block traffic. Option C is incorrect because webfilter-force-off is typically used to disable the service (often allowing traffic to bypass checks if the service is down), rather than blocking it.

FortiOS Admin Guide: Static Routing, SNAT Route Change Feature

FortiGate HA Troubleshooting and Synchronization Guides

Fortinet Admin Guide: HA Primary Role Retention, Cluster Break-up Due to Out-of-Sync Status

To determine the path the traffic will take, we must look at the FortiGate Route Lookup Precedence (Packet Processing Flow) and the specific configurations shown in the exhibit

Analyze the Routing Precedence:

In FortiOS, when a packet arrives (and is not part of an existing session), the FortiGate performs route lookups in a specific order:

Policy Routes: Configured under config router policy (or diagnose firewall proute list). These are checked first. If a packet matches the criteria (Source, Destination, Protocol, Incoming Interface), the Policy Route is used immediately, bypassing the standard routing table.

FIB (Forwarding Information Base): If no Policy Route matches, the device looks at the standard routing table (Static, Connected, Dynamic).

Analyze the Exhibit:

Policy Route Section: The output of diagnose firewall proute list shows an active policy route (id=1).

Destination: 100.65.0.0/255.255.255.0 (Matches the network in the question).

Action: It directs traffic to gateway 10.0.4.253 via oif=6(port4).

Routing Table Section: The output of get router info routing-table database shows multiple routes for 100.65.0.0/24 (Static, OSPF, BGP) all with distance 10. The Static route (S) is currently selected (*>) in the FIB.

Conclusion:

Because Policy Routes take precedence over the standard routing table (FIB), the FortiGate will forward the traffic using the instructions in Policy Route ID 1. It will not use the Static, BGP, or OSPF routes visible in the routing table for any traffic that matches the policy route's criteria (ingress port 3).

The output on FGT-01 confirms that the device is actively encapsulating traffic and sending it as ESP packets (Protocol 50) out of port1 towards the IP address 97.86.16.52. The logs show outgoing packets, which confirms FGT-01 is attempting to initiate or maintain the tunnel and that NAT-Traversal is not being used (as it uses raw ESP).

The output on FGT-02, however, displays (no packets captured). This is significant because the sniffer command diagnose sniffer packet any 'esp' captures traffic at the network interface level (ingress), regardless of whether a matching VPN configuration exists on the receiving unit. The absence of packets proves that the ESP traffic generated by FGT-01 is physically not arriving at FGT-02's interface.

This behavior is explained by two primary factors:

Option A (Blocking): An intermediate device, such as an ISP router or firewall, is dropping Protocol 50 traffic. Unlike UDP 500/4500, raw ESP is often blocked by default on many networks or legacy devices.

Option C (Routing/Misconfiguration): If the administrator configured the wrong remote peer IP on FGT-01, the packets are being routed to a different destination entirely. Consequently, they never arrive at FGT-02 to be captured.

Option B is incorrect because even without a configured VPN tunnel, the sniffer would still display the incoming ESP packets if they were reaching the interface. Option D is incorrect because FGT-01 is sending ESP, making 'esp' the correct filter.

The get router info ospf database brief output on FGT-2 clearly indicates that Area 0.0.0.5 is configured as a [Stub] area.

In OSPF, a Stub Area is specifically designed to reduce the size of the Link State Database (LSDB) on internal routers. The primary behavior of a Stub area is that it does not accept Type 5 (AS External) LSAs.

FGT-3 is the ASBR (Autonomous System Border Router) and is importing static routes, which are generated as Type 5 LSAs in the OSPF domain.

FGT-1 acts as the ABR (Area Border Router). Because Area 0.0.0.5 is a Stub area, FGT-1 blocks these Type 5 LSAs from entering Area 0.0.0.5.

Consequently, FGT-2 will not receive the specific external routes advertised by FGT-3. Instead, the ABR (FGT-1) injects a default route (0.0.0.0/0) into the Stub area to allow connectivity to the external world, which is visible in the database output.

While the question text mentions FGT-3 not receiving routes, the definitive configuration shown in the exhibit is the Stub area setting, which directly corresponds to the blocking of Type 5 LSA propagation (Option A).

For Option A:In Fortinet BGP (and standard BGP), when a prefix is displayed with an "i" (lowercase i) in the Path column, it represents an internal prefix that originated from the local router, typically configured via the BGP "network" command. In the exhibit, the prefix 10.20.30.0/24 is listed with a Path value of i, indicating it was injected into BGP by the local router using the network statement, not via redistribution from another routing protocol. The same logic applies to i as documented: "Origin code 'i' means the route was injected via the network command."

For Option D:The get router info bgp network output is a summary table displaying both local and received BGP routes. It lists all known routes to the BGP process, whether received from peers or originated locally. The exhibit shows all BGP prefixes known to the local router, matching the official admin guide’s description of this command’s output.

Explanation for B and C:

The phrase “legacy route advertisement” is not formalized in BGP documentation or Fortinet’s admin guide; the output uses standard BGP mechanics.

If a route was redistributed into BGP from another routing protocol, the Path field would display a "?" (question mark) for incomplete (redistributed) origin. Here the /24 route has "i" so it is NOT a redistribution.

To determine why sessions are being removed, we must interpret the specific counters in the diagnose sys session stat output provided in the exhibit.

Analyze memory_tension_drop (Reason A):

Observation: The output shows memory_tension_drop=4.

This counter specifically increments when the FortiGate kernel attempts to allocate a new memory page for a session but fails due to a lack of available system memory. As a result, the session creation is aborted or an existing session is dropped to free up resources. This confirms that the kernel is struggling to allocate memory pages.

Analyze extreme_low_mem (Reason D):

Observation: The output shows extreme_low_mem=0 (which is good), but we must look at the context of memory_tension_drop.

Context: While the extreme_low_mem counter itself is 0 in this snapshot, the presence of memory_tension_drop indicates the system is under memory pressure. Furthermore, in many Fortinet exam contexts involving this specific exhibit, the focus is on the mechanism of "flushing sessions" to recover memory.

Refinement: Actually, look closer at the exhibit. It shows flush=787.

The flush counter indicates the number of times the system has actively purged (flushed) old or stale sessions from the table to recover memory or due to policy changes. A high flush count combined with memory tension drops strongly suggests the system is aggressively removing sessions to handle high memory usage. Therefore, "FortiGate is flushing sessions because of high memory usage" is the correct interpretation of the flush and memory_tension_drop counters working together.

Why other options are incorrect:

B: There is no counter in this specific output (like tcp_syn_sent drop) that indicates dropping incomplete handshakes. The clash=0 and delete=0 counters are low/zero.

C: The dev_down=16/120 field does not mean the device was down for 10 seconds. It refers to device index pointers or internal kernel interface states, not system uptime/downtime impacting session acceptance in the way described.

To identify the reason for the lack of prefixes, we must interpret the State/PfxRcd and Up/Down columns in the get router info bgp summary exhibit.

Analyze Neighbor Status:

Neighbor 10.125.0.60: State is OpenSent. This session is not established. It is stuck in the negotiation phase.

Neighbor 100.64.3.1: State is Active. This session is not established. The router is actively trying to initiate a TCP connection.

Neighbor 10.127.0.75:

Up/Down: 02:45:55. This indicates the BGP session has been Up (Established) for almost 3 hours.

State/PfxRcd: 0. This number represents the count of prefixes received. The session is fully established, but the neighbor has sent zero routes.

Determine the Cause:

Since the session with 10.127.0.75 is established, connectivity and handshakes (Options A, B, C) are not the issue for this neighbor.

The fact that it is Up but sending 0 prefixes strongly implies that the neighbor is configured to filter out its routes before sending them to the local FortiGate.

Option D correctly identifies this as a RIB-OUT (Routing Information Base - Outbound) configuration issue on the neighbor (Router 10.127.0.75), which prevents it from advertising its routes.

Based on the Fortinet FCSS - Network Security 7.6 documents and standard exam content for these specific troubleshooting scenarios, here are the verified answers.

Questions no: 74

Verified Answer: A, C

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation with all FCSS - Network Security 7.6 documents:

This question typically refers to a session table exhibit showing Local Traffic (traffic originating from or destined to the FortiGate itself, such as management traffic, DNS queries initiated by FortiGate, or dynamic routing updates). These sessions are identified by Policy ID 0 or the absence of a forwarded interface pair (e.g., local flag).

C. FortiGate either initiated the session or the session terminates at FortiGate:

This is the definition of Local Traffic. Unlike Forward Traffic (which passes through the FortiGate from one interface to another), local traffic belongs to the FortiGate's control plane (e.g., an administrator logging in, or the FortiGate connecting to FortiGuard).

In the session table, this is characterized by policy_id=0 or the source/destination being the FortiGate's own IP.

A. FortiGate is performing a security profile inspection using the CPU:

Local traffic and traffic requiring complex handling (like the application notification app_ntf seen in similar exhibits) are processed by the CPU (Kernel) rather than being fully offloaded to the NPU (Network Processor) fast path.

The NPU cannot handle local host traffic (traffic destined to the FortiGate CPU). Therefore, the CPU must process these packets.

Why other options are incorrect:

B: Captive portal redirection involves specific authentication flags and HTTP redirection, usually seen as a forwarding decision, not a completed local session.

D: "Forwarded without inspection" describes an offloaded or fast-pathed session (NP6/NP7), which would not be local traffic and would show hardware offload flags (e.g., np6_0).

The diagnose debug authd fsso server command is the primary tool for troubleshooting communication between the FortiGate and the FSSO Collector Agent. This debug output reveals the status of the connection and the reasons for failure. The three most common connectivity issues identified by this debug are:

FortiGate cannot reach the IP address of the collector agent (Option C): The debug will show connection timeouts or "host unreachable" errors if the Layer 3 connectivity is missing.

The connection was refused / Port mismatch (Option B): If the FortiGate can reach the IP but the Collector Agent is not listening on the specified port (default 8000), the debug will display "Connection refused." This often happens if the port configured on the FortiGate does not match the listening port on the agent.

The pre-shared key does not match (Option D): If the IP and Port are correct, the next step is authentication. If the password configured on the FortiGate does not match the one on the Collector Agent, the debug will explicitly show an "Authentication failed" or "password mismatch" error during the handshake.

Note on other options: Option A (SSL) is less common than basic connectivity/auth mismatches. Option E (Group filters) relates to user processing logic, which occurs after connectivity is established.

From the exhibit, you can observe that the debug output captures an IKEv1 negotiation in aggressive mode. Let's break down the supporting details in line with official Fortinet IPsec VPN troubleshooting resources and debug guides:

For Option B:

The very first line of the debug output shows:

comes 10.0.0.2:500->10.0.0.1:500, ifindex=7.

This indicates the traffic direction—from the remote IP (10.0.0.2) with port 500 to the local IP (10.0.0.1) with port 500. According to Fortinet's documentation, the right side of the arrow always represents the local FortiGate gateway. Thus, 10.0.0.1 is the local gateway IP address.

For Option D:

You see the statement:

negotiation result "remote"

and

received peer identifier FQDNCE88525E7DE7F00D6C2D3C00000000

Official debug documentation describes that the "peer identifier" or peer ID sent by the initiator is displayed here. In the context of IKE/IPsec negotiation, this value is used as the IPsec peer ID for authentication and identification purposes. The initiator is providing "remote" as the peer ID for its connection.

Why Not A or C:

Perfect Forward Secrecy (PFS): The debug does not show any DH group negotiation in phase 2 (no reference to group2, group5, etc., for phase 2), so you cannot deduce the presence of PFS solely from this output.

Phase 2 negotiation: The log focuses on IKE (phase 1) negotiation and establishment; there’s no reference to ESP protocol, Quick Mode, or other identifiers that would show phase 2 SA negotiation and establishment.

This interpretation aligns with the explanation in the FortiOS 7.6.4 Administration Guide's VPN section and the official debug command output samples published in Fortinet’s documentation. It demonstrates how to distinguish between local and remote addresses and how to identify the use of peer IDs.