Cyber Monday 2024! Hurry Up, Grab the Special Discount - Save 25% - Ends In 00:00:00 Coupon code: SAVE25
Welcome to Pass4Success

- Free Preparation Discussions

Fortinet Exam NSE7_ZTA-7.2 Topic 3 Question 7 Discussion

Actual exam question for Fortinet's NSE7_ZTA-7.2 exam
Question #: 7
Topic #: 3
[All NSE7_ZTA-7.2 Questions]

FortiNAC has alarm mappings configured for MDM compliance failure, and FortiClient EMS is added as a MDM connector When an endpoint is quarantined by FortiClient EMS, what action does FortiNAC perform?

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: A

In the scenario where FortiNAC has alarm mappings configured for MDM (Mobile Device Management) compliance failure and FortiClient EMS (Endpoint Management System) is integrated as an MDM connector, the typical response when an endpoint is quarantined by FortiClient EMS is to isolate the host in the registration VLAN. This action is consistent with FortiNAC's approach to network access control, focusing on ensuring network security and compliance. By moving the non-compliant or quarantined host to a registration VLAN, FortiNAC effectively segregates it from the rest of the network, mitigating potential risks while allowing for further investigation or remediation steps. Reference: FortiNAC documentation, MDM Compliance and Response Actions.


Contribute your Thoughts:

Silvana
5 months ago
Exactly. It helps prevent any potential security risks by isolating non-compliant endpoints.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lezlie
5 months ago
I believe so. It's important for network security purposes to quarantine endpoints that do not meet compliance standards.
upvoted 0 times
...
Hildegarde
5 months ago
That makes sense. So the action taken by FortiNAC is to isolate the host in the registration VLAN when there is an MDM compliance failure?
upvoted 0 times
...
Silvana
5 months ago
I think when an endpoint is quarantined by FortiClient EMS, FortiNAC isolates the host in the registration VLAN.
upvoted 0 times
...
Gaston
6 months ago
I agree with Lottie, I also think it's A) The host is isolated in the registration VLAN.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lottie
6 months ago
I see your point, Roselle, but I still think A) is the correct answer.
upvoted 0 times
...
Thomasena
6 months ago
I'm not sure, but I think C) The host is forced to authenticate again makes sense.
upvoted 0 times
...
Roselle
7 months ago
I believe the host is disabled, so I would go with D).
upvoted 0 times
...
Lottie
7 months ago
I think the answer is A) The host is isolated in the registration VLAN.
upvoted 0 times
...
Jodi
8 months ago
Hmm, good point. Option C does seem like a reasonable choice too. Forcing re-authentication could be a nice way to give the user a chance to fix the problem.
upvoted 0 times
...
Chuck
8 months ago
I'm not sure about that. Wouldn't it be better for FortiNAC to just force the host to re-authenticate? That way, the user could potentially resolve the compliance issue and get back on the network.
upvoted 0 times
...
Jacquelyne
8 months ago
Yeah, I agree. Option B looks like the correct answer here. Quarantining the endpoint should trigger the 'at-risk' status in FortiNAC rather than isolating it or disabling it completely.
upvoted 0 times
Patti
7 months ago
Yes, B seems to be the most appropriate response in this scenario.
upvoted 0 times
...
Toshia
7 months ago
I would go with B as well. It seems like the most logical action.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lindy
8 months ago
I think B makes sense in this context as well.
upvoted 0 times
...
Martin
8 months ago
D) The host is disabled
upvoted 0 times
...
Tawny
8 months ago
C) The host is forced to authenticate again
upvoted 0 times
...
Andree
8 months ago
B) The host is marked at risk
upvoted 0 times
...
Margurite
8 months ago
A) The host is isolated in the registration VLAN
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Katie
8 months ago
Hmm, this is an interesting question. From what I understand, if FortiClient EMS quarantines an endpoint, FortiNAC should mark the host as at-risk. That seems to match option B.
upvoted 0 times
...

Save Cancel
az-700  pass4success  az-104  200-301  200-201  cissp  350-401  350-201  350-501  350-601  350-801  350-901  az-720  az-305  pl-300  

Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /pass.php:70) in /pass.php on line 77