Paloalto Networks PSE-Strata-Pro-24 Palo Alto Networks Systems Engineer Professional - Hardware Firewall Exam Practice Test

Policy Optimizer is a feature designed to help administrators improve the efficiency and effectiveness of security policies on Palo Alto Networks Next-Generation Firewalls (NGFWs). It focuses on identifying unused or overly permissive policies to streamline and optimize the configuration.

Why "Identify Security policy rules with unused applications" (Correct Answer C)?Policy Optimizer provides visibility into existing security policies and identifies rules thathave unused or outdated applications. For example:

It can detect if a rule allows applications that are no longer in use.

It can identify rules with excessive permissions, enabling administrators to refine them for better security and performance.By addressing these issues, Policy Optimizer helps reduce the attack surface and improves the overall manageability of the firewall.

Why not "Recommend best practices on new policy creation" (Option A)?Policy Optimizer focuses on optimizingexisting policies, not creating new ones. While best practices can be applied during policy refinement, recommending new policy creation is not its purpose.

Why not "Show unused licenses for Cloud-Delivered Security Services (CDSS) subscriptions and firewalls" (Option B)?Policy Optimizer is not related to license management or tracking. Identifying unused licenses is outside the scope of its functionality.

Why not "Act as a migration tool to import policies from third-party vendors" (Option D)?Policy Optimizer does not function as a migration tool. While Palo Alto Networks offers tools for third-party firewall migration, this is separate from the Policy Optimizer feature.

When adopting additional security features over time, remaining aligned with Zero Trust principles requires a focus on constant visibility, control, and adherence to best practices. The following actions are the most relevant:

Why "Apply decryption where possible to inspect and log all new and existing traffic flows" (Correct Answer B)?Zero Trust principles emphasize visibility into all traffic, whether encrypted or unencrypted. Without decryption, encrypted traffic becomes a blind spot, which attackers can exploit. By applying decryption wherever feasible, organizations ensure they can inspect, log, and enforce policies on encrypted traffic, thus adhering to Zero Trust principles.

Why "Use the Best Practice Assessment (BPA) tool to measure progress toward Zero Trust principles" (Correct Answer C)?The BPA tool provides detailed insights into the customer’s security configuration, helpingmeasure alignment with Palo Alto Networks’ Zero Trust best practices. It identifies gaps in security posture and recommends actionable steps to strengthen adherence to Zero Trust principles over time.

Why not "Turn on all licensed Cloud-Delivered Security Services (CDSS) subscriptions in blocking mode for all policies" (Option A)?While enabling CDSS subscriptions (like Threat Prevention, URL Filtering, Advanced Threat Prevention) in blocking mode can enhance security, it is not an action specifically tied to maintaining alignment with Zero Trust principles. A more holistic approach, such as decryption and BPA analysis, is critical to achieving Zero Trust.

Why not "Use the Policy Optimizer tool to understand security rules allowing users to bypass decryption" (Option D)?Policy Optimizer is used to optimize existing security rules by identifying unused or overly permissive policies. While useful, it does not directly address alignment with Zero Trust principles or help enforce decryption.

The SE has demonstrated an NGFW managed by SCM, and the CISO now wants the POV to show progress toward industry standards (e.g., CSC) and verify effective use of purchased features (e.g., CDSS subscriptions like Advanced Threat Prevention). The SE must ensure the POV delivers measurable evidence during the testing timeline. Let’s evaluate the options.

Step 1: Understand the CISO’s Request

Industry Standards (e.g., CSC): The Center for Internet Security’s Critical Security Controls (e.g., CSC 1: Inventory of Devices, CSC 4: Secure Configuration) require visibility, threat prevention, and policy enforcement, which NGFW and SCM can address.

Feature Utilization: Confirm that licensed functionalities (e.g., App-ID, Threat Prevention, URL Filtering) are active and effective.

POV Goal: Provide verifiable progress and utilization metrics within the testing timeline.

To answer this question, let’s analyze each Cloud-Delivered Security Service (CDSS) subscription and its role in inline machine learning (ML). Palo Alto Networks leverages inline ML capabilities across several of its subscriptions to provide real-time protection against advanced threats and reduce the need for manual intervention.

A. Enterprise DLP (Data Loss Prevention)

Enterprise DLP is a Cloud-Delivered Security Service that prevents sensitive data from being exposed. Inline machine learning is utilized to accurately identify and classify sensitive information in real-time, even when traditional data patterns or signatures fail to detect them. This service integrates seamlessly with Palo Alto firewalls to mitigate data exfiltration risks by understanding content as it passes through the firewall.

B. Advanced URL Filtering

Advanced URL Filtering uses inline machine learning to block malicious URLs in real-time. Unlike legacy URL filtering solutions, which rely on static databases, Palo Alto Networks' Advanced URL Filtering leverages ML to identify and stop new malicious URLs that have not yet been categorized in static databases. This proactive approach ensures that organizations are protected against emerging threats like phishing and malware-hosting websites.

C. Advanced WildFire

Advanced WildFire is a cloud-based sandboxing solution designed to detect and prevent zero-day malware. While Advanced WildFire is a critical part of Palo Alto Networks’ security offerings, it primarily uses static and dynamic analysis rather than inline machine learning. The ML-based analysis in Advanced WildFire happens after a file is sent to the cloud for processing, rather than inline, so it does not qualify under this question’s scope.

D. Advanced Threat Prevention

Advanced Threat Prevention (ATP) uses inline machine learning to analyze traffic in real-time and block sophisticated threats such as unknown command-and-control (C2) traffic. This service replaces the traditional Intrusion Prevention System (IPS) approach by actively analyzing network traffic and blocking malicious payloads inline. The inline ML capabilities ensure ATP can detectand block threats that rely on obfuscation and evasion techniques.

E. IoT Security

IoT Security is focused on discovering and managing IoT devices connected to the network. While this service uses machine learning for device behavior profiling and anomaly detection, it does not leverage inline machine learning for real-time traffic inspection. Instead, it operates at a more general level by providing visibility and identifying device risks.

Key Takeaways:

Enterprise DLP, Advanced URL Filtering, and Advanced Threat Prevention all rely on inline machine learning to provide real-time protection.

Advanced WildFire uses ML but not inline; its analysis is performed in the cloud.

IoT Security applies ML for device management rather than inline threat detection.

DNS-based threats, such as DNS tunneling, phishing, or malware command-and-control (C2) activities, are commonly used by attackers to exfiltrate data or establish malicious communications. Palo Alto Networks firewalls provide several mechanisms to address these threats, and the correct method isDNS sinkholing.

Why "DNS sinkholing" (Correct Answer D)?DNS sinkholing redirects DNS queries for malicious domains to an internal or non-routable IP address, effectively preventing communication with malicious domains. When a user or endpoint tries to connect to a malicious domain, the sinkhole DNS entry ensures the traffic is blocked or routed to a controlled destination.

DNS sinkholing is especially effective for blocking malware trying to contact its C2 server or preventing data exfiltration.

Why not "DNS proxy" (Option A)?A DNS proxy is used to forward DNS queries from endpoints to an upstream DNS server. While it can be part of a network's DNS setup, it does not actively stop DNS-based threats.

Why not "Buffer overflow protection" (Option B)?Buffer overflow protection is a method used to prevent memory-related attacks, such as exploiting software vulnerabilities. It is unrelated to DNS-based threat prevention.

Why not "DNS tunneling" (Option C)?DNS tunneling is itself a type of DNS-based threat where attackers encode malicious traffic within DNS queries and responses. This option refers to the threat itself, not the method to stop it.

The prospective customer has provided precise performance requirements for their firewall purchase, and the systems engineer must recommend a suitable Palo Alto Networks Strata Hardware Firewall (e.g., PA-Series) model. The requirements include a minimum of 200,000 connections per second (CPS) and 15 Gbps of throughput with App-ID and Threat Prevention enabled. Let’s evaluate the best approach to meet these needs.

Step 1: Understand the Requirements

Connections per Second (CPS): 200,000 new sessions per second, indicating the firewall’s ability to handle high transaction rates (e.g., web traffic, API calls).

Throughput with App-ID and Threat Prevention: 15 Gbps, measured with applicationidentification and threat prevention features active, reflecting real-world NGFW performance.

Goal: Identify a PA-Series model that meets or exceeds these specs while considering the customer’s actual traffic profile for optimal sizing.

Palo Alto Networks AIOps for NGFW is a cloud-delivered service that leverages telemetry data and machine learning (ML) to provide proactive operational insights, best practice recommendations, and issue prevention.

Why "It is offered in two license tiers: a free version and a premium version" (Correct Answer B)?AIOps for NGFW is available in two tiers:

Free Tier:Provides basic operational insights and best practices at no additional cost.

Premium Tier:Offers advanced capabilities, such as AI-driven forecasts, proactive issue prevention, and enhanced ML-based recommendations.

Why "It uses telemetry data to forecast, preempt, or identify issues, and it uses machine learning (ML) to adjust and enhance the process" (Correct Answer C)?AIOps uses telemetry data from NGFWs to analyze operational trends, forecast potential problems, and recommend solutions before issues arise. ML continuously refines these insights by learning from real-world data, enhancing accuracy and effectiveness over time.

Why not "It is offered in two license tiers: a commercial edition and an enterprise edition" (Option A)?This is incorrect because the licensing model for AIOps is based on "free" and "premium" tiers, not "commercial" and "enterprise" editions.

Why not "It forwards log data to Advanced WildFire to anticipate, prevent, or identify issues, and it uses machine learning (ML) to refine and adapt to the process" (Option D)?AIOps does not rely on Advanced WildFire for its operation. Instead, it uses telemetry data directly from the NGFWs to perform operational and security analysis.

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.

A large deployment of 500 firewalls requires a scalable, centralized logging and reporting infrastructure. Here's the analysis of each option:

Option A: Combine Panorama for firewall management with Palo Alto Networks' cloud-based Strata Logging Service to offer scalability for the company's logging and reporting infrastructure

TheStrata Logging Service(or Cortex Data Lake) is a cloud-based solution that offers massive scalability for logging and reporting. Combined with Panorama, it allows for centralized log collection, analysis, and policy management without the need for extensive on-premises infrastructure.

This approach is ideal for large-scale environments like the one described in the scenario, as it ensures cost-effectiveness and scalability.

This is the correct recommendation.

Option B: Use Panorama for firewall management and to transfer logs from the 500 firewalls directly to a third-party SIEM for centralized logging and reporting

While third-party SIEM solutions can be integrated with Palo Alto Networks NGFWs, directly transferring logs from 500 firewalls to a SIEM can lead to bottlenecks and scalability issues. Furthermore, relying on third-party solutions may not provide the same level of native integration as the Strata Logging Service.

This is not the ideal recommendation.

Option C: Highlight the efficiency of PAN-OS, which employs AI to automatically extract critical logs and generate daily executive reports, and confirm that the purchase of 500 NGFWs is sufficient

While PAN-OS provides AI-driven insights and reporting, this option does not address the requirement for centralized logging and reporting. It also dismisses the need for additional infrastructure to handle logs from 500 firewalls.

This is incorrect.

Option D: Deploy a pair of M-1000 log collectors in the customer data center, and route logs from all 500 firewalls to the log collectors for centralized logging and reporting

The M-1000 appliance is an on-premises log collector, but it has limitations in terms of scalability and storage capacity when compared to cloud-based options like the Strata Logging Service. Deploying only two M-1000 log collectors for 500 firewalls would result in potential performance and storage challenges.

This is not the best recommendation.

References:

Palo Alto Networks documentation on Panorama

Strata Logging Service (Cortex Data Lake) overview in Palo Alto Networks Docs

LDAP Query (Answer B):

Palo Alto Networks NGFWs can queryLDAP directories(such as Active Directory) to validate whether submitted credentials match the corporate directory.

Domain Credential Filter (Answer C):

TheDomain Credential Filterfeature ensures that submitted credentials are checked against valid corporate credentials, preventing credential misuse.

Why Not A:

Group mappingis used to identify user groups for policy enforcement but does not validate submitted credentials.

Why Not D:

WMI client probingis used for user identification but is not a method for validating submitted credentials.

References from Palo Alto Networks Documentation:

Credential Theft Prevention

Synchronizing a large Active Directory (AD) with over 20,000 groups can introduce significant overhead if all groups are synchronized, especially when only a subset of groups (e.g., 1,000 groups) are required for Security policies. The most efficient approach is to configure agroup mapping profile with an include group listto minimize unnecessary synchronization and reduce administrative overhead.

Why "Configure a group mapping profile with an include group list" (Correct AnswerC)?Using a group mapping profile with aninclude group listensures that only the required 1,000 groups are synchronized with the firewall. This approach:

Reduces the load on the firewall's User-ID process by limiting the number of synchronized groups.

Simplifies management by focusing on the specific groups relevant to Security policies.

Avoids synchronizing the entire directory (20,000 groups), which would be inefficient and resource-intensive.

Why not "Configure a group mapping profile, without a filter, to synchronize all groups" (Option B)?Synchronizing all 20,000 groups would unnecessarily increase administrative and resource overhead. This approach contradicts the requirement to reduce administrative burden.

Why not "Configure a group mapping profile with custom filters for LDAP attributes that are mapped to the user roles" (Option A)?While filtering LDAP attributes can be useful, this approach is more complex to implement and manage compared to an include group list. It does not directly address the problem of limiting synchronization to a specific subset of groups.

Why not "Configure NGFWs to synchronize with the AD after deploying the Cloud Identity Engine (CIE) and agents" (Option D)?While the Cloud Identity Engine (CIE) is a modern solution for user and group mapping, it is unnecessary in this scenario. A traditional group mapping profile with an include list is sufficient and simpler to implement. CIE is typically used for complex hybrid or cloud environments.

The problem provides several constraints and design requirements that must be carefully considered:

Bandwidth Requirement:

The customer needs an NGFW capable of handling a total throughput of 72 Gbps.

The PA-5445 is specifically designed for high-throughput environments and supports up to81.3 Gbps Threat Prevention throughput(as per the latest hardware performance specifications). This ensures the throughput needs are fully met with some room for growth.

Interface Compatibility:

The customer mentions that their core switches support up to40 Gbps interfaces. The design must include aggregate links to meet the overall bandwidth while aligning with the 40 Gbps interface limitations.

The PA-5445 supports40Gbps QSFP+ interfaces, making it a suitable option for the hardware requirement.

No Change to IP Address Structure:

Since the customer cannot modify their IP address structure, deploying the NGFW inLayer-2 or Virtual Wire modeis ideal.

Virtual Wire modeallows the firewall to inspect traffic transparently between two Layer-2 devices without modifying the existing IP structure. Similarly, Layer-2 mode allows the firewall to behave like a switch at Layer-2 while still applying security policies.

Threat Prevention, DNS, and Sandboxing Requirements:

The customer requires advanced security features likeThreat Preventionand potentiallysandboxing(WildFire). The PA-5445 is equipped to handle these functionalities with its dedicated hardware-based architecture for content inspection and processing.

Aggregate Interface Groups:

The architecture should includeaggregate interface groupsto distribute traffic across multiple physical interfaces to support the high throughput requirement.

By aggregating2 x 40Gbps interfaces on both sides of the pathin Virtual Wire or Layer-2 mode, the design ensures sufficient bandwidth (up to 80 Gbps per side).

Why PA-5445 in Layer-2 or Virtual Wire mode is the Best Option:

Option Asatisfies all the customer’s requirements:

The PA-5445 meets the 72 Gbps throughput requirement.

2 x 40 Gbps interfaces can be aggregated to handle traffic flow between the core switches and the NGFW.

Virtual Wire or Layer-2 mode preserves the IP address structure, while still allowing full threat prevention and DNS inspection capabilities.

The PA-5445 also supports sandboxing (WildFire) for advanced file-based threat detection.

Why Not Other Options:

Option B:

The PA-5430 is insufficient for the throughput requirement (72 Gbps). Itsmaximum Threat Prevention throughput is 60.3 Gbps, which does not provide the necessary capacity.

Option C:

While the PA-5445 is appropriate, deploying it inLayer-3 modewould require changes to the IP address structure, which the customer explicitly stated is not an option.

Option D:

The PA-5430 does not meet the throughput requirement. Although Layer-2 or Virtual Wire mode preserves the IP structure, the throughput capacity of the PA-5430 is a limiting factor.

References from Palo Alto Networks Documentation:

Palo Alto Networks PA-5400 Series Datasheet (latest version)

Specifies the performance capabilities of the PA-5445 and PA-5430 models.

Palo Alto Networks Virtual Wire Deployment Guide

Explains how Virtual Wire mode can be used to transparently inspect traffic without changing the existing IP structure.

Aggregated Ethernet Interface Documentation

Details the configuration and use of aggregate interface groups for high throughput.

The customer’s CIO highlights two key pain points: (1) the operations team lacks expertise to efficiently manage PAN-OS upgrades and support interactions, diverting focus from valuable tasks, and (2) the company lacked tools to monitor NGFW capacity, leading to a rushed upgrade. The goal is to recommend long-term solutions leveraging Palo Alto Networks’ offerings for Strata Hardware Firewalls. Options B and D—training and AIOps Premium within Strata Cloud Manager (SCM)—address these issues by enhancing team capability and providing proactive management tools. Below is a detailed explanation, verified against official documentation.

Step 1: Analyzing the Customer’s Challenges

Expertise Gap: The CIO notes that identifying issues and engaging support requires expertise the operations team doesn’t fully have or can’t prioritize. Upgrading PAN-OS on Strata NGFWs involves tasks like version compatibility checks, pre-upgrade validation, and troubleshooting, which demand familiarity with PAN-OS tools and processes.

Capacity Visibility: The rushed upgrade stemmed from not knowing the NGFWs were nearing capacity (e.g., CPU, memory, session limits), indicating a lack of monitoring or predictive analytics.

Long-term solutions must address both operational efficiency and proactive capacity management, aligning with Palo Alto Networks’ ecosystem for Strata firewalls.

Advanced WildFire is Palo Alto Networks' cloud-based malware analysis and prevention solution. It determines whether files are malicious by executing them in a sandbox environment and observing their behavior. To address the customer's concern about the file categorization, the systems engineer must provide evidence of the file's behavior. Here’s the analysis of each option:

Option A: Review the threat logs for information to provide to the customer

Threat logs can provide a summary of events and verdicts for malicious files, but they do not include the detailed behavior analysis needed to convince the customer.

While reviewing the logs is helpful as a preliminary step, it does not provide the level of proof the customer needs.

This option is not sufficient on its own.

Option B: Use the WildFire Analysis Report in the log to show the customer the malicious actions the file took when it was detonated

WildFire generates an analysis report that includes details about the file's behavior during detonation in the sandbox, such as network activity, file modifications, process executions, and any indicators of compromise (IoCs).

This report provides concrete evidence to demonstrate why the file was flagged as malicious. It is the most accurate way to assure the customer that WildFire's decision was based on observed malicious actions.

This is the best option.

Option C: Open a TAG ticket for the customer and allow support engineers to determine the appropriate action

While opening a support ticket is a valid action for further analysis or appeal, it isnot a direct way to assure the customer of the current WildFire verdict.

This option does not directly address the customer’s request for immediate proof.

This option is not ideal.

Option D: Do nothing because the customer will realize Advanced WildFire is right

This approach is dismissive of the customer's concerns and does not provide any evidence to support WildFire's decision.

This option is inappropriate.

References:

Palo Alto Networks documentation on WildFire

WildFire Analysis Reports

The most effective way to reduce the risk of exploitation bynewly announced vulnerabilitiesis throughAdvanced Threat Prevention (ATP). ATP usesinline deep learningto identify and block exploitation attempts, even for zero-day vulnerabilities, in real time.

Why "Advanced Threat Prevention’s command injection and SQL injection functionsuse inline deep learning against zero-day threats" (Correct Answer B)?Advanced Threat Prevention leveragesdeep learning modelsdirectly in the data path, which allows it to analyze traffic in real time and detect patterns of exploitation, including newly discovered vulnerabilities being actively exploited in the wild. It specifically targets advanced tactics like:

Command injection.

SQL injection.

Memory-based exploits.

Protocol evasion techniques.

This functionality lowers the risk of exploitation byactively blocking attack attemptsbased on their behavior, even when a signature is not yet available. This approach makes ATP the most valuable solution for addressing new and actively exploited vulnerabilities.

Why not "Advanced URL Filtering uses machine learning (ML) to learn which malicious URLs are being utilized by the attackers, then block the resulting traffic" (Option A)?While Advanced URL Filtering is highly effective at blocking access to malicious websites, it does not provide the inline analysis necessary to prevent direct exploitation of vulnerabilities. Exploitation often happens within the application or protocol layer, which Advanced URL Filtering does not inspect.

Why not "Single Pass Architecture and parallel processing ensure traffic is efficiently scanned against any enabled Cloud-Delivered Security Services (CDSS) subscription" (Option C)?Single Pass Architecture improves performance by ensuring all enabled services (like Threat Prevention, URL Filtering, etc.) process traffic efficiently. However, it is not a feature that directly addresses vulnerability exploitation or zero-day attack detection.

Why not "WildFire loads custom OS images to ensure that the sandboxing catches any activity that would affect the customer's environment" (Option D)?WildFire is a sandboxing solution designed to detect malicious files and executables. While it is useful for analyzing malware, it does not provide inline protection against exploitation of newly announced vulnerabilities, especially those targeting network protocols or applications.

The question asks how Palo Alto Networks (PANW) Strata Hardware Firewalls enable the mapping of transactions as part of Zero Trust principles, requiring a systems engineer (SE) to provide two narratives for a customer RFP response. Zero Trust is a security model that assumes no trust by default, requiring continuous verification of all transactions, users, and devices—inside and outside the network. The Palo Alto Networks Next-Generation Firewall (NGFW), part of the Strataportfolio, supports this through its advanced visibility, decryption, and policy enforcement capabilities. Below is a detailed explanation of why options B and D are the correct narratives, verified against official Palo Alto Networks documentation.

Step 1: Understanding Zero Trust and Transaction Mapping in PAN-OS

Zero Trust principles, as defined by frameworks like NIST SP 800-207, emphasize identifying and verifying every transaction (e.g., network flows, application requests) based on context such as user identity, application, and data. For Palo Alto Networks NGFWs, "mapping of transactions" refers to the ability to identify, classify, and control network traffic with granular detail, enabling verification and enforcement aligned with Zero Trust.

The PAN-OS operating system achieves this through:

App-ID: Identifies applications regardless of port or protocol.

User-ID: Maps IP addresses to user identities.

Content-ID: Inspects and protects content, including decryption for visibility.

Security Policies: Enforces rules based on these mappings.

Advanced DNS Security on Palo Alto Networks firewalls is designed to identify and prevent a wide range of DNS-based attacks. Among the listed options, "High entropy DNS domains" is a specific example of a DNS attack that Advanced DNS Security can detect and block.

Why "High entropy DNS domains" (Correct Answer A)?High entropy DNS domains are often used in attacks where randomly generated domain names (e.g., gfh34ksdu.com) are utilized by malware or bots to evade detection. This is a hallmark of Domain Generation Algorithms (DGA)-based attacks. Palo Alto Networks firewalls with Advanced DNS Security use machine learning to detect such domains by analyzing the entropy (randomness) of DNS queries. High entropy values indicate the likelihood of a dynamically generated or malicious domain.

Why not "Polymorphic DNS" (Option B)?While polymorphic DNS refers to techniques that dynamically change DNS records to avoid detection, it is not specifically identified as an attack type mitigated by Advanced DNS Security in Palo Alto Networks documentation. The firewall focuses more on the behavior of DNS queries, such as detecting DGA domains or anomalous DNS traffic patterns.

Why not "CNAME cloaking" (Option C)?CNAME cloaking involves using CNAME records to redirect DNS queries to malicious or hidden domains. Although Palo Alto firewalls may detect and block malicious DNS redirections, the focus of Advanced DNS Security is primarily on identifying patterns of DNS abuse like DGA domains, tunneling, or high entropy queries.

Why not "DNS domain rebranding" (Option D)?DNS domain rebranding involves changing the domain names associated with malicious activity to evade detection. This is typically a tactic used for persistence but is not an example of a DNS attack type specifically addressed by Advanced DNS Security.

Advanced DNS Security focuses on dynamic, real-time identification of suspicious DNS patterns, such as high entropy domains, DNS tunneling, or protocol violations. High entropy DNS domains are directly tied to attack mechanisms like DGAs, making this the correct answer.

Palo Alto Networks Next-Generation Firewalls (NGFWs) provide robust security features across a variety of use cases. Let’s analyze each option:

A. Code-embedded NGFWs provide enhanced IoT security by allowing PAN-OS code to be run on devices that do not support embedded VM images.

This statement is incorrect. NGFWs do not operate as "code-embedded" solutions for IoT devices. Instead, they protect IoT devices through advanced threat prevention, device identification, and segmentation capabilities.

B. Serverless NGFW code security provides public cloud security for code-only deployments that do not leverage VM instances or containerized services.

This is not a valid use case. Palo Alto NGFWs provide security for public cloud environments using VM-series firewalls, CN-series (containerized firewalls), and Prisma Cloud for securing serverless architectures. NGFWs do not operate in "code-only" environments.

C. IT/OT segmentation firewalls allow operational technology (OT) resources in plant networks to securely interface with IT resources in the corporate network.

This is a valid use case. Palo Alto NGFWs are widely used in industrial environments to provide IT/OT segmentation, ensuring that operational technology systems in plants or manufacturing facilities can securely communicate with IT networks while protecting against cross-segment threats. Features like App-ID, User-ID, and Threat Prevention are leveraged for this segmentation.

D. PAN-OS GlobalProtect gateways allow companies to run malware and exploit prevention modules on their endpoints without installing endpoint agents.

This is incorrect. GlobalProtect gateways provide secure remote access to corporate networks and extend the NGFW’s threat prevention capabilities to endpoints, but endpoint agents are required to enforce malware and exploit prevention modules.

Key Takeaways:

IT/OT segmentation with NGFWs is a real and critical use case in industries like manufacturing and utilities.

The other options describe features or scenarios that are not applicable or valid for NGFWs.

References:

Palo Alto Networks NGFW Use Cases

Industrial Security with NGFWs