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

Step 1: Understanding Strata Cloud Manager (SCM) Premium

Strata Cloud Manager is a unified management interface for Strata NGFWs, Prisma Access, and other Palo Alto Networks solutions. The Premium version (subscription-based) includes advanced features like:

AIOps Premium: Predictive analytics, capacity planning, and compliance reporting.

Compliance Posture Management: Pre-built dashboards and reports for specific regulatory frameworks.

Compliance frameworks in SCM Premium provide visibility into adherence to standards like PCI DSS and NIST, generating actionable insights and audit-ready reports based on firewall configurations, logs, and traffic data.

DNS Security (Answer C):

DNS Security is the appropriate subscription for addressing threats over port 53.

DNS tunneling is a common method used for data exfiltration, infiltration, and C2 activities, as it allows malicious traffic to be hidden within legitimate DNS queries.

The DNS Security service applies machine learning models to analyze DNS queries in real-time, block malicious domains, and prevent tunneling activities.

It integrates seamlessly with the NGFW, ensuring advanced protection against DNS-based threats without requiring additional infrastructure.

Why Not Threat Prevention (Answer A):

Threat Prevention is critical for blocking malware, exploits, and vulnerabilities, but it does not specifically address DNS-based tunneling or C2 activities over port 53.

Why Not App-ID and Data Loss Prevention (Answer B):

While App-ID can identify applications, and Data Loss Prevention (DLP) helps prevent sensitive data leakage, neither focuses on blocking DNS tunneling or malicious activity over port 53.

Why Not Advanced Threat Prevention and Advanced URL Filtering (Answer D):

Advanced Threat Prevention and URL Filtering are excellent for broader web and network threats, but DNS tunneling specifically requires the DNS Security subscription, which specializes in DNS-layer threats.

References from Palo Alto Networks Documentation:

DNS Security Subscription Overview

To secure and protect your traffic using CDSS, Cloud NGFW for AWS provides Palo Alto Networks protections such as:

App-ID. Based on patented Layer 7 traffic classification technology, the App-ID service allows you to see the applications on your network, learn how they work, observe their behavioral characteristics, and understand their relative risk. Cloud NGFW for AWS identifies applications and application functions via multiple techniques, including application signatures, decryption, protocol decoding, and heuristics. These capabilities determine the exact identity of applications traversing your network, including those attempting to evade detection by masquerading as legitimate traffic by hopping ports or using encryption.

Threat Prevention. The Palo Alto Networks Threat Prevention service protects your network by providing multiple layers of prevention to confront each phase of an attack. In addition to essential intrusion prevention service (IPS) capabilities, Threat Prevention possesses the unique ability to detect and block threats on any ports—rather than simply invoking signatures based on a limited set of predefined ports.

Advanced URL Filtering. This critical service built into Cloud NGFW for AWS stops unknown web-based attacks in real-time to prevent patient zero with the industry’s only ML-powered Advanced URL Filtering. Advanced URL Filtering combines the renowned Palo Alto Networks malicious URL database with the industry’s first real-time web protection engine so organizations can automatically and instantly detect and prevent new malicious and targeted web-based threats.

DNS. DNS Security gives you real-time protection, applying industry-first protections to disrupt attacks that use DNS. Tight integration with a Palo Alto Networks Next-Generation Firewall (NGFW) gives you automated protections, prevents attackers from bypassing security measures, and eliminates the need for independent tools or changes to DNS routing. DNS Security gives your organization a critical new control point to stop attacks.

WildFire. Palo Alto Networks Advanced WildFire® is the industry’s largest cloud-based malware prevention engine that protects organizations from highly evasive threats using patented machine learning detection engines, enabling automated protections across network, cloud, and endpoints. Advanced WildFire analyzes every unknown file for malicious intent and then distributes prevention in record time—60 times faster than the nearest competitor—to reduce the risk of patient zero.

https://docs.paloaltonetworks.com/cloud-ngfw-aws/administration/protect/cloud-delivered-security-services

Strata Cloud Manager (SCM) is Palo Alto Networks’ centralized cloud-based management platform for managing network security solutions, including Prisma Access and Prisma SD-WAN. SCM can also integrate with VM-Series firewalls for managing virtualized NGFW deployments.

Why A (Prisma SD-WAN) Is Correct

SCM is the management interface for Prisma SD-WAN, enabling centralized orchestration, monitoring, and configuration of SD-WAN deployments.

Why D (VM-Series NGFW) Is Correct

SCM supports managing VM-Series NGFWs, providing centralized visibility and control for virtualized firewall deployments in cloud or on-premises environments.

Why Other Options Are Incorrect

B (Prisma Cloud): Prisma Cloud is a separate product for securing workloads in public cloud environments. It is not managed via SCM.

C (Cortex XDR): Cortex XDR is a platform for endpoint detection and response (EDR). It is managed through its own console, not SCM.

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.

Create a New Threat Profile (Answer B):

Performance tuning in Intrusion Prevention System (IPS) involves ensuring that only the most relevant and necessary signatures are enabled for the specific environment.

Palo Alto Networks allows you to create custom threat profiles to selectively enable signatures that match the threats most likely to affect the environment. This reduces unnecessary resource usage and ensures optimal performance.

By tailoring the signature set, organizations can focus on real threats without impacting overall throughput and latency.

Why Not A:

Leaving all signatures turned on is not a best practice because it may consume excessive resources, increasing processing time and degrading firewall performance, especially in high-throughput environments.

Why Not C:

While working with TAC for debugging may help identify specific performance bottlenecks, it is not a recommended approach for routine performance tuning. Instead, proactive configuration changes, such as creating tailored threat profiles, should be made.

Why Not D:

Disabling irrelevant threat signatures can improve performance, but this task is effectively accomplished by creating a new threat profile. Manually disabling signatures one by one is not scalable or efficient.

References from Palo Alto Networks Documentation:

Threat Prevention Best Practices

Custom Threat Profile Configuration

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

The Strata 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.

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.

To address the MSSP’s requirement for logically separated BGP peering setups while efficiently managing standard routing rules and updates, Palo Alto Networks offers the Advanced Routing Engine introduced in PAN-OS 11.0. The Advanced Routing Engine enhances routing capabilities, including support for logical 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.

When planning a firewall deployment with SSL/TLS decryption enabled, it is crucial to consider the additional processing overhead introduced by decrypting and inspecting encrypted traffic. Here are the details for each statement:

Why "SSL decryption traffic amounts vary from network to network" (Correct Answer A)?SSL decryption traffic varies depending on the organization’s specific network environment, user behavior, and applications. For example, networks with heavy web traffic, cloud applications, or encrypted VoIP traffic will have more SSL/TLS decryption processing requirements. This variability means each deployment must be properly assessed and sized accordingly.

Why "Perfect Forward Secrecy (PFS) ephemeral key exchange algorithms such as Diffie-Hellman Ephemeral (DHE) and Elliptic-Curve Diffie-Hellman Exchange (ECDHE) consume more processing resources than Rivest-Shamir-Adleman (RSA) algorithms" (Correct Answer C)?PFS algorithms like DHE and ECDHE generate unique session keys for each connection, ensuring better security but requiring significantly more processing power compared to RSA key exchange. When decryption is enabled, firewalls must handle these computationally expensive operations for every encrypted session, impacting performance and sizing requirements.

Why not "Large average transaction sizes consume more processing power to decrypt" (Option B)?While large transaction sizes can consume additional resources, SSL/TLS decryption is more dependent on the number of sessions and the complexity of the encryption algorithms used, rather than the size of the transactions. Hence, this is not a primary best practice consideration.

Why not "Rivest-Shamir-Adleman (RSA) certificate authentication method consumes more resources than Elliptic Curve Digital Signature Algorithm (ECDSA), but ECDSA is more secure" (Option D)?This statement discusses certificate authentication methods, not SSL/TLS decryption performance. While ECDSA is more efficient and secure than RSA, it is not directly relevant to sizing considerations for firewall deployments with decryption enabled.

A. Discuss the PAN-OS Policy Optimizer feature as a means to safely migrate port-based rules to application-based rules.

PAN-OS includes the Policy Optimizer tool, which helps migrate legacy port-based rules to application-based policies incrementally and safely. This tool identifies unused, redundant, or overly permissive rules and suggests optimized policies based on actual traffic patterns.

Why Other Options Are Incorrect

B: The migration wizard does not automatically convert port-based rules to application-based rules. Migration must be carefully planned and executed using tools like the Policy Optimizer.

C: Running two firewalls in parallel adds unnecessary complexity and is not a best practice for migration.

D: While port-based rules are supported, relying on them defeats the purpose of transitioning to application-based security.

Cobalt Strike is a popular post-exploitation framework often used by attackers for Command and Control (C2) operations. Malleable C2 profiles allow attackers to modify the behavior of their C2 communication, making detection more difficult. Stopping these attacks in real time requires deep inline inspection and the ability to block zero-day and evasive threats.

Why "Advanced Threat Prevention and PAN-OS 10.2" (Correct Answer B)?Advanced Threat Prevention (ATP) on PAN-OS 10.2 uses inline deep learning models to detect and block Cobalt Strike Malleable C2 attacks in real time. ATP is designed to prevent evasive techniques and zero-day threats, which is essential for blocking Malleable C2. PAN-OS 10.2 introduces enhanced capabilities for detecting malicious traffic patterns and inline analysis of encrypted traffic.

ATP examines traffic behavior and signature-less threats, effectively stopping evasive C2 profiles.

PAN-OS 10.2 includes real-time protections specifically for Malleable C2.

Why not "Next-Generation CASB on PAN-OS 10.1" (Option A)?Next-Generation CASB (Cloud Access Security Broker) is designed to secure SaaS applications and does not provide the inline C2 protection required to stop Malleable C2 attacks. CASB is not related to Command and Control detection.

Why not "Threat Prevention and Advanced WildFire with PAN-OS 10.0" (Option C)?Threat Prevention and Advanced WildFire are effective for detecting and preventing malware and known threats. However, they rely heavily on signatures and sandboxing for analysis, which is not sufficient for stopping real-time evasive C2 traffic. PAN-OS 10.0 lacks the advanced inline capabilities provided by ATP in PAN-OS 10.2.

Why not "DNS Security, Threat Prevention, and Advanced WildFire with PAN-OS 9.x" (Option D)?While DNS Security and Threat Prevention are valuable for blocking malicious domains and known threats, PAN-OS 9.x does not provide the inline deep learning capabilities needed for real-time detection and prevention of Malleable C2 attacks. The absence of advanced behavioral analysis in PAN-OS 9.x makes this combination ineffective against advanced C2 attacks.

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 an existing customer expands their online business into physical stores and requires Next-Generation Firewalls (NGFWs) at those locations to handle SD-WAN, security, and data protection—while mandating a vendor-validated deployment method—a systems engineer must leverage Palo Alto Networks’ Strata Hardware Firewall capabilities and validated deployment strategies. The Strata portfolio, particularly the PA-Series NGFWs, is designed to secure branch offices with integrated SD-WAN and robust security features. Below is a detailed explanation of why options A and D are the correct actions, grounded in Palo Alto Networks’ documentation and practices as of March 08, 2025.

Step 1: Recommend Professional Services (Option A)

The customer’s requirement for a "vendor-validated deployment method" implies a need for expertise and assurance that the solution meets their specific needs—SD-WAN, security, and data protection—across new physical stores. Palo Alto Networks offers professional services, either directly or through certified partners, to ensure proper deployment of Strata Hardware Firewalls like the PA-400 Series or PA-1400 Series, which are ideal for branch deployments. These services provide end-to-end support, from planning to implementation, aligning with the customer’s mandate for a validated approach.

Professional Services Scope: Palo Alto Networks’ professional services include architecture design, deployment, and optimization for NGFWs and SD-WAN. This ensures that the PA-Series firewalls are configured to handle SD-WAN (e.g., dynamic path selection), security (e.g., Threat Prevention with ML-powered inspection), and data protection (e.g., WildFire for malware analysis and Data Loss Prevention integration).

Vendor Validation: By recommending these services, the engineer ensures a deployment that adheres to Palo Alto Networks’ best practices, meeting the customer’s requirement for a vendor-validated method. This is particularly critical for a customer new to physical store deployments, as it mitigates risks and accelerates time-to-value.

Strata Hardware Relevance: The PA-410, for example, is a desktop NGFW designed for small branch offices, offering SD-WAN and Zero Trust security out of the box. Professional services ensure its correct integration into the customer’s ecosystem.

In this scenario, the company does not use on-premises Active Directory and manages devices with Entra ID and Jamf, which implies a cloud-native and modern management setup. Below is the evaluation of each option:

Option A: Captive portal

Captive portal is typically used in environments where identity mapping is needed for unmanaged devices or guest users. It provides a mechanism for users to authenticate themselves through a web interface.

However, in this case, the company is managing devices using Entra ID and Jamf, which means identity information can already be centralized through other means. Captive portal is not an ideal solution here.

This option is not appropriate.

Option B: User-ID agents configured for WMI client probing

WMI (Windows Management Instrumentation) client probing is a mechanism used to map IP addresses to usernames in a Windows environment. This approach is specific to on-premises Active Directory deployments and requires direct communication with Windows endpoints.

Since the company does not have an on-premises AD and is using Entra ID and Jamf, this method is not applicable.

This option is not appropriate.

Option C: GlobalProtect with an internal gateway deployment

GlobalProtect is Palo Alto Networks' VPN solution, which allows for secure remote access. It also supports identity-based mapping when deployed with internal gateways.

In this case, GlobalProtect with an internal gateway can serve as a mechanism to provide user and device visibility based on the managed devices connecting through the gateway.

This option is appropriate.

Option D: Cloud Identity Engine synchronized with Entra ID

The Cloud Identity Engine provides a cloud-based approach to synchronize identity information from identity providers like Entra ID (formerly Azure AD).

In a cloud-native environment with Entra ID and Jamf, the Cloud Identity Engine is a natural fit as it integrates seamlessly to provide identity visibility for applications and data.

This option is appropriate.