HP HPE7-A02 Exam With Confidence Using Practice Dumps

When HPE Aruba Networking ClearPass Device Insight (CPDI) shows a recommendation for "Windows 8/10" with 70% accuracy for a generic device cluster, it means that CPDI has detected that these devices match about 70% of the system rule criteria for defining "Windows 8/10" devices. This percentage indicates the confidence level based on the observed characteristics and behavior of the devices, helping administrators understand the likelihood that these devices are indeed running Windows 8 or 10.

In the exhibit, the HPE Aruba Networking Central settings for the 9x00 gateway show that traffic inspection is enabled, and the gateway is set to operate in IDS (Intrusion Detection System) mode with the fail strategy set to "Block". This configuration means that the gateway will drop traffic if it matches a rule in the active ruleset.

1.Active Ruleset: The ruleset version 9861 is active, and the gateway is configured to automatically update the ruleset daily.

2.Traffic Matching Rules: When traffic matches a rule in the active ruleset, it is flagged as suspicious or malicious.

3.Block Mode: Since the fail strategy is set to "Block", any traffic that matches a rule in the active ruleset will be dropped to prevent potential threats.

Rogue AP Containment Methods:

HPE Aruba Networking recommends using wireless deauthentication as the preferred method for rogue AP containment.

Deauthentication sends deauth frames to clients connected to rogue APs, causing them to disconnect. This method is effective without introducing unnecessary disruptions to the wired infrastructure.

Key Points:

Wireless Deauthentication is simple, efficient, and widely supported across client devices.

Tarpit Containment is more aggressive and may cause unintentional disruptions to legitimate clients.

Wired Containment involves blocking traffic at the switch level but is complex and may impact legitimate infrastructure traffic.

Option Analysis:

Option A: Correct. Wireless deauthentication is the recommended method as it targets rogue AP clients without excessive network impact.

Option B: Incorrect. Combining wireless tarpit and wired containment is overkill and not typically recommended.

Option C: Incorrect. Wireless tarpit can be effective but is generally not the first choice due to its aggressive nature.

Option D: Incorrect. Wired containment is more complex and reserved for specific use cases, not general recommendations.