Paloalto Networks PSE-Strata-Pro-24 Questions Answers

Zero-day malware attacks are sophisticated threats that exploit previously unknown vulnerabilities or malware signatures. To provide protection against such attacks, the appropriate Cloud-Delivered Security Service subscription must be included.

Why "Advanced WildFire" (Correct Answer C)?Advanced WildFire is Palo Alto Networks’ sandboxing solution that identifies and prevents zero-day malware. It uses machine learning, dynamic analysis, and static analysis to detect unknown malware in real time.

Files and executables are analyzed in the cloud-based sandbox, and protections are shared globally within minutes.

Advanced WildFire specifically addresses zero-day threats by dynamically analyzing suspicious files and generating new signatures.

Why not "AI Access Security" (Option A)?AI Access Security is designed to secure SaaS applications by monitoring and enforcing data protection and compliance. While useful for SaaS security, it does not focus on detecting or preventing zero-day malware.

Why not "Advanced Threat Prevention" (Option B)?Advanced Threat Prevention (ATP) focuses on detecting zero-day exploits (e.g., SQL injection, buffer overflows) using inline deep learning but is not specifically designed to analyze and prevent zero-day malware. ATP complements Advanced WildFire, but WildFire is the primary solution for malware detection.

Why not "App-ID" (Option D)?App-ID identifies and controls applications on the network. While it improves visibility and security posture, it does not address zero-day malware detection or prevention.

The customer is seeking centralized policy management to reduce human error while maintaining compliance with their contractual obligations to AWS and Azure. Here's the evaluation of each option:

Option A: Cloud NGFWs at both CSPs; provide the customer a license for a Panorama virtual appliance from their CSP's marketplace of choice to centrally manage the systems

Cloud NGFW is a fully managed Next-Generation Firewall service by Palo Alto Networks, offered in AWS and Azure marketplaces. It integrates natively with the CSP infrastructure, making it a good fit for customers with existing CSP agreements.

Panorama, Palo Alto Networks' centralized management solution, can be deployed as a virtual appliance in the CSP marketplace of choice, enabling centralized policy management across all NGFWs.

This option addresses the customer's need for centralized management while leveraging their existing contracts with AWS and Azure.

This option is appropriate.

Option B: Cloud NGFWs in AWS and VM-Series firewall in Azure; the customer selects a PAYG licensing Panorama deployment in their CSP of choice

This option suggests using Cloud NGFW in AWS but VM-Series firewalls in Azure. While VM-Series is a flexible virtual firewall solution, it may not align with the customer’s stated preference for CSP-managed services like Cloud NGFW.

This option introduces a mix of solutions that could complicate centralized management and reduce operational efficiency.

This option is less appropriate.

Option C: VM-Series firewalls in both CSPs; manually built Panorama in the CSP of choice on a host of either type: Palo Alto Networks provides a license

VM-Series firewalls are well-suited for cloud deployments but require more manual configuration compared to Cloud NGFW.

Building a Panorama instance manually on a host increases operational overhead and does not leverage the customer’s existing CSP marketplaces.

This option is less aligned with the customer's needs.

Option D: VM-Series firewall and CN-Series firewall in both CSPs; provide the customer a private-offer Panorama virtual appliance from their CSP’s marketplace of choice to centrally manage the systems

This option introduces both VM-Series and CN-Series firewalls in both CSPs. While CN-Series firewalls are designed for Kubernetes environments, they may not be relevant if the customer does not specifically require container-level security.

Adding CN-Series firewalls may introduce unnecessary complexity and costs.

This option is not appropriate.

When configuring Advanced URL Filtering on a Palo Alto Networks firewall, the "Ransomware" category should be explicitly blocked to protect customers from URLs associated with ransomware activities. Ransomware URLs typically host malicious code or scripts designed to encrypt user data and demand a ransom. By blocking the "Ransomware" category, systems engineers can proactively prevent users from accessing such URLs.

Why "Ransomware" (Correct Answer A)?The "Ransomware" category is specifically curated by Palo Alto Networks to include URLs known to deliver ransomware or support ransomware operations. Blocking this category ensures that any URL categorized as part of this list will be inaccessible to end-users, significantly reducing the risk of ransomware attacks.

Why not "High Risk" (Option B)?While the "High Risk" category includes potentially malicious sites, it is broader and less targeted. It may not always block ransomware-specific URLs. "High Risk" includes a range of websites that are flagged based on factors like bad reputation or hosting malicious content in general. It is less focused than the "Ransomware" category.

Why not "Scanning Activity" (Option C)?The "Scanning Activity" category focuses on URLs used in vulnerability scans, automated probing, or reconnaissance by attackers. Although such activity could be a precursor to ransomware attacks, it does not directly block ransomware URLs.

Why not "Command and Control" (Option D)?The "Command and Control" category is designed to block URLs used by malware or compromised systems to communicate with their operators. While some ransomware may utilize command-and-control (C2) servers, blocking C2 URLs alone does not directly target ransomware URLs themselves.

By using the Advanced URL Filtering profile and blocking the "Ransomware" category, the firewall applies targeted controls to mitigate ransomware-specific threats.

The default configuration of a Palo Alto Networks NGFW includes a set of default security rules that determine how traffic is handled when no explicit rules are defined. Here's the explanation for each option:

Option A: Security profiles are applied to all policies by default, eliminating implicit trust of any data traversing the firewall

Security profiles (such as Antivirus, Anti-Spyware, and URL Filtering) are not applied to any policies by default. Administrators must explicitly apply them to security rules.

This statement is incorrect.

Option B: The default policy action for intrazone traffic is deny, eliminating implicit trust within a security zone

By default, traffic within the same zone (intrazone traffic) is allowed. For example, traffic between devices in the "trust" zone is permitted unless explicitly denied by an administrator.

This statement is incorrect.

Option C: The default policy action allows all traffic unless explicitly denied

Palo Alto Networks firewalls do not have an "allow all" default rule. Instead, they include a default "deny all" rule for interzone traffic and an implicit "allow" rule for intrazone traffic.

This statement is incorrect.

Option D: The default policy action for interzone traffic is deny, eliminating implicit trust between security zones

By default, traffic between different zones (interzone traffic) is denied. This aligns with the principle of zero trust, ensuring that no traffic is implicitly allowed between zones. Administrators must define explicit rules to allow interzone traffic.

This statement is correct.