PSE-Strata-Pro-24 Palo Alto Networks Systems Engineer Professional - Hardware Firewall Question and Answers

Palo Alto Networks' PAN-OS supports API keys for authentication when interacting with the firewall’s RESTful and XML-based APIs. By default, API keys do not have an expiration time set, but the expiration time for API keys can be configured by an administrator to meet specific requirements, such as a time-based deactivation after two hours. This is particularly useful for compliance and security purposes, where API keys should not remain active indefinitely.

Here’s an evaluation of the options:

Option A:This is incorrect because the default setting for API keys does not include an expiration time. By default, API keys are valid indefinitely unless explicitly configured otherwise.

Option B:This is incorrect because PAN-OS fully supports API keys. The API keys are integral to managing access to the firewall's APIs and provide a secure method for authentication.

Option C:This is incorrect because PAN-OS does support API key expiration when explicitly configured. While the default is "no expiration," the feature to configure an expiration time (e.g., 2 hours) is available.

Option D (Correct):The correct response to the RFP clause is that the default API key settings need to be modified to set the expiration time to 120 minutes (2 hours). This aligns with the customer requirement to enforce API key deactivation based on time. Administrators can configure this using the PAN-OS management interface or the CLI.

How to Configure API Key Expiration (Steps):

Access theWeb InterfaceorCLIon the firewall.

Navigate toDevice > Management > API Key Lifetime Settings(on the GUI).

Set the desired expiration time (e.g., 120 minutes).

Alternatively, use the CLI to configure the API key expiration:

set deviceconfig system api-key-expiry

commit

Verify the configuration using the show command or by testing API calls to ensure the key expires after the set duration.

References:

Palo Alto Networks API Documentation: https://docs.paloaltonetworks.com/apis

Configuration Guide: Managing API Key Expiration

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.

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.

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

To address the MSSP’s requirement for logically separated BGP peering setups while efficiently managing standard routing rules and updates, Palo Alto Networks offers theAdvanced Routing Engineintroduced in PAN-OS 11.0. The Advanced Routing Engine enhances routing capabilities,including support forlogical routers, which is critical in this scenario.

Why A is Correct

Logical routers enable the MSSP to create isolated BGP peering configurations for each customer.

The Advanced Routing Engine allows the MSSP to share standard routing profiles (such as filters, policies, or maps) across logical routers, simplifying the deployment and maintenance of routing configurations.

This approach ensures scalability, as each logical router can handle the unique needs of a customer while leveraging shared routing rules.

Why Other Options Are Incorrect

B:While using APIs to automate deployment is beneficial, it does not solve the need for logically separated BGP peering setups. Logical routers provide this separation natively.

C:While virtual routers in PAN-OS can separate BGP peering setups, they do not support the efficient sharing of standard routing rules and profiles across multiple routers.

D:Virtual systems (vsys) are used to segregate administrative domains, not routing configurations. Vsys is not the appropriate solution for managing BGP peering setups across multiple customers.

Key Takeaways:

PAN-OS Advanced Routing Engine with logical routers simplifies BGP peering management for MSSPs.

Logical routers provide the separation required for customer environments while enabling shared configuration profiles.

References:

Palo Alto Networks PAN-OS 11.0 Advanced Routing Documentation

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.

After a customer has concluded an evaluation of Palo Alto Networks solutions, it is critical to provide a detailed analysis of the results and benefits gained during the evaluation. The following two tools are most appropriate:

Why "Best Practice Assessment (BPA)" (Correct Answer A)?The BPA evaluates the customer's firewall configuration against Palo Alto Networks' recommended best practices. It highlights areas where the configuration could be improved to strengthen security posture. This is an excellent tool to showcase how adopting Palo Alto Networks' best practices aligns with industry standards and improves security performance.

Why "Security Lifecycle Review (SLR)" (Correct Answer B)?The SLR provides insights into the customer's security environment based on data collected during the evaluation. It identifies vulnerabilities, risks, and malicious activities observed in the network and demonstrates how Palo Alto Networks' solutions can address these issues. SLR reports use clear visuals and metrics, making it easier to showcase the benefits of the evaluation.

Why not "Firewall Sizing Guide" (Option C)?The Firewall Sizing Guide is a pre-sales tool used to recommend the appropriate firewall model based on the customer's network size, performance requirements, and other criteria. It is not relevant for showcasing the benefits of an evaluation.

Why not "Golden Images" (Option D)?Golden Images refer to pre-configured templates for deploying firewalls in specific use cases. While useful for operational efficiency, they are not tools for demonstrating the outcomes or benefits of a customer evaluation.

Aperimeter firewallis traditionally deployed at the boundary of a network to protect it from external threats. It provides a variety of protections, including blocking unauthorized access, inspecting traffic flows, and safeguarding sensitive resources. Here is how the options apply:

Option A (Correct):Perimeter firewalls providenetwork layer protectionby filtering and inspecting traffic entering or leaving the network at the outer edge. This is one of their primary roles.

Option B:Power utilization is not a functional or architectural aspect of a firewall and is irrelevant when describing the purpose of a perimeter firewall.

Option C:Securing east-west traffic is more aligned withdata center firewalls, which monitor lateral (east-west) movement of traffic within a virtualized or segmented environment. A perimeter firewall focuses on north-south traffic instead.

Option D (Correct):A perimeter firewall primarily securesnorth-south traffic, which refers to traffic entering and leaving the network. It ensures that inbound and outbound traffic adheres to security policies.

Option E (Correct):Perimeter firewalls play a critical role inguarding against external attacks, such as DDoS attacks, malicious IP traffic, and other unauthorized access attempts.

References:

Palo Alto Networks Firewall Deployment Use Cases: https://docs.paloaltonetworks.com

Security Reference Architecture for North-South Traffic Control.

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

When preparing for a customer meeting, it’s important to understand their specific challenges and align solutions accordingly. The notes suggest that the customer is facing difficulties securing their cloud apps and remote users, which are core areas addressed by Palo Alto Networks’ Zero Trust and SASE solutions. However, jumping directly into a pitch or product demonstration without validating the customer's specific challenges may fail to build trust or fully address their needs.

Option A:Leading with a pre-structured pitch about Zero Trust principles may not resonate with the customer if their challenges are not fully understood first. The team needs to gather insights into the customer's security pain points before presenting a solution.

Option B (Correct):Discovery questionsare a critical step in the sales process, especially when addressing complex topics like Zero Trust. By designing targeted questions about the customer’s challenges with identity, devices, data, and access, the SE can identify specific pain points. These insights can then be used to tailor a Zero Trust strategy that directly addresses the customer’s concerns. This approach ensures the meeting is customer-focused and demonstrates that the SE understands their unique needs.

Option C:While a product demonstration of GlobalProtect, Prisma Access, and SaaS security is valuable, it should come after discovery. Presenting products prematurely may seem like a generic sales pitch and could fail to address the customer’s actual challenges.

Option D:Prisma SASEis an excellent solution for addressing cloud security and remote user challenges, but recommending it without first understanding the customer’s specific needs may undermine trust. This step should follow after discovery and validation of the customer’s pain points.

Examples of Discovery Questions:

What are your primary security challenges with remote users and cloud applications?

Are you currently able to enforce consistent security policies across your hybrid environment?

How do you handle identity verification and access control for remote users?

What level of visibility do you have into traffic to and from your cloud applications?

References:

Palo Alto Networks Zero Trust Overview: https://www.paloaltonetworks.com/zero-trust

Best Practices for Customer Discovery: https://docs.paloaltonetworks.com/sales-playbooks

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.

To demonstrate compliance with Zero Trust principles, a systems engineer can leverage the rich reporting and logging capabilities of Palo Alto Networks firewalls. The focus should be on creating reports that align with the customer's Zero Trust strategy, providing detailed insights into policy enforcement, user activity, and application usage.

Option A:Scheduling a pre-built PDF report does not offer the flexibility to align the report with the customer’s specific Zero Trust plan. While useful for automated reporting, this option is too generic for demonstrating Zero Trust compliance.

Option B (Correct):Custom reportsin the "Monitor > Manage Custom Reports" tab allow the customer to build tailored reports that align with their Zero Trust plan. These reports can include granular details such as application usage, user activity, policy enforcement logs, and segmentation compliance. This approach ensures the customer can present evidence directly related to their Zero Trust implementation.

Option C:Using a third-party tool is unnecessary as Palo Alto Networks NGFWs already have built-in capabilities to log, report, and demonstrate policy enforcement. This option adds complexity and may not fully leverage the native capabilities of the NGFW.

Option D:TheApplication Command Center (ACC)is useful for visualizing traffic and historical data but is not a reporting tool. While it can complement custom reports, it is not a substitute for generating Zero Trust-specific compliance reports.

References:

Managing Reports in PAN-OS: https://docs.paloaltonetworks.com

Zero Trust Monitoring and Reporting Best Practices: https://www.paloaltonetworks.com/zero-trust

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) isallowed. 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.

References:

Palo Alto Networks documentation on Security Policy Defaults

Knowledge Base article on Default Security Rules

Protecting web servers from advanced threats like SQL injection, command injection, XSS attacks, and IIS exploits requires a solution capable of deep packet inspection, behavioral analysis, andinline prevention of zero-day attacks. The most effective solution here isAdvanced Threat Prevention (ATP)combined withPAN-OS 11.x.

Why "Advanced Threat Prevention and PAN-OS 11.x" (Correct Answer B)?Advanced Threat Prevention (ATP) enhances traditional threat prevention by usinginline deep learning modelsto detect and block advanced zero-day threats, includingSQL injection, command injection, and XSS attacks. With PAN-OS 11.x, ATP extends its detection capabilities to detect unknown exploits without relying on signature-based methods. This functionality is critical for protecting web servers in scenarios where a dedicated WAF is unavailable.

ATP provides the following benefits:

Inline prevention of zero-day threats using deep learning models.

Real-time detection of attacks like SQL injection and XSS.

Enhanced protection for web server platforms like IIS.

Full integration with the Palo Alto Networks Next-Generation Firewall (NGFW).

Why not "Threat Prevention and PAN-OS 11.x" (Option A)?Threat Prevention relies primarily on signature-based detection for known threats. While it provides basic protection, it lacks the capability to block zero-day attacks using advanced methods like inline deep learning. For zero-day SQL injection and XSS attacks, Threat Prevention alone is insufficient.

Why not "Threat Prevention, Advanced URL Filtering, and PAN-OS 10.2 (and higher)" (Option C)?While this combination includes Advanced URL Filtering (useful for blocking malicious URLs associated with exploits), it still relies onThreat Prevention, which is signature-based. This combination does not provide the zero-day protection needed for advanced injection attacks or XSS vulnerabilities.

Why not "Advanced WildFire and PAN-OS 10.0 (and higher)" (Option D)?Advanced WildFire is focused on analyzing files and executables in a sandbox environment to identify malware. While it is excellent for identifying malware, it is not designed to provide inline prevention for web-based injection attacks or XSS exploits targeting web servers.

Panorama is Palo Alto Networks’ centralized management solution for managing multiple firewalls. It supports multiple deployment options to suit different infrastructure needs. The valid deployment options are as follows:

Why "As a virtual machine (ESXi, Hyper-V, KVM)" (Correct Answer A)?Panorama can be deployed as a virtual machine on hypervisors like VMware ESXi, Microsoft Hyper-V, and KVM. This is a common option for organizations that already utilize virtualized infrastructure.

Why "With a cloud service provider (AWS, Azure, GCP)" (Correct Answer B)?Panorama is available for deployment in the public cloud on platforms like AWS, Microsoft Azure, and Google Cloud Platform. This allows organizations to centrally manage firewalls deployed in cloud environments.

Why "As a dedicated hardware appliance (M-100, M-200, M-500, M-600)" (Correct Answer E)?Panorama is available as a dedicated hardware appliance with different models (M-100, M-200, M-500, M-600) to cater to various performance and scalability requirements. This is ideal for organizations that prefer physical appliances.

Why not "As a container (Docker, Kubernetes, OpenShift)" (Option C)?Panorama is not currently supported as a containerized deployment. Containers are more commonly used for lightweight and ephemeral services, whereas Panorama requires a robust and persistent deployment model.

Why not "On a Raspberry Pi (Model 4, Model 400, Model 5)" (Option D)?Panorama cannot be deployed on low-powered hardware like Raspberry Pi. The system requirements for Panorama far exceed the capabilities of Raspberry Pi hardware.