Deal of The Day! Hurry Up, Grab the Special Discount - Save 25% - Ends In 00:00:00 Coupon code: SAVE25
Welcome to Pass4Success

- Free Preparation Discussions
Mail Us support@pass4success.com
Location US
Mob_nav_barsMENU

Cisco 400-007 Exam - Topic 9 Question 37 Discussion

A network hacker is trying to interrupt the transport packet on IPSEC. A packet with duplicate sequence numbers is introduced. The customer sends high-priority traffic during this window. Which design parameter should be considered to mitigate this issue?
B) Apply anti-replay window 4096.
A) Classify and Mark duplicate sequence packets.
C) Restrict keywork in IPSEC Tunnel.
D) Increase QoS shape policy.

Cisco 400-007 Exam - Topic 9 Question 37 Discussion

Actual exam question for Cisco's 400-007 exam
Question #: 37
Topic #: 9
[All 400-007 Questions]

A network hacker is trying to interrupt the transport packet on IPSEC. A packet with duplicate sequence numbers is introduced. The customer sends high-priority traffic during this window. Which design parameter should be considered to mitigate this issue?

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: B

by Heike at Apr 20, 2024, 02:36 PM

Limited Time Offer

25%

Off

Get Premium 400-007 Questions as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF

Contribute your Thoughts:

0/2000 characters
Submit Cancel
Gilbert
9 months ago
B is the best choice, but what if the window isn't big enough?
upvoted 0 times
...
Deonna
9 months ago
I disagree, D seems more relevant for high-priority traffic.
upvoted 0 times
...
Tonette
10 months ago
Surprised this is even a question, isn't it obvious?
upvoted 0 times
...
Micheal
10 months ago
I think A could help too, but not as effective.
upvoted 0 times
...
Cortney
10 months ago
Definitely B, anti-replay window is crucial!
upvoted 0 times
...
Meaghan
10 months ago
I think restricting keywords in the IPSEC tunnel is more about access control, not really about handling duplicate sequences. I might lean towards option B as well.
upvoted 0 times
...
Ira
11 months ago
I vaguely recall that increasing QoS might not directly address the sequence number issue. It seems more related to traffic management than security.
upvoted 0 times
...
Brunilda
11 months ago
I'm not entirely sure, but I feel like classifying duplicate packets could help too. Wasn't there a similar question about packet classification in our practice tests?
upvoted 0 times
...
Devora
11 months ago
I remember something about anti-replay mechanisms in IPSEC, so I think option B might be the right choice.
upvoted 0 times
...
Phil
11 months ago
Increasing the QoS shape policy might be a way to prioritize the high-priority traffic, but I'm not sure if that's the best solution for this specific problem.
upvoted 0 times
...
Florinda
11 months ago
Restricting the keywork in the IPSEC tunnel? I'm not sure I fully understand that one. I'll need to research that option a bit more.
upvoted 0 times
...
Tomas
11 months ago
Okay, let's see. Classifying and marking duplicate sequence packets sounds like a good first step to identify the problem. I'll make sure to consider that.
upvoted 0 times
...
Socorro
11 months ago
Hmm, this seems like a tricky one. I'll need to think carefully about the different options and how they might address the issue.
upvoted 0 times
...
Evangelina
11 months ago
Applying an anti-replay window of 4096 could help mitigate the issue, but I'll need to double-check how that works in the context of IPSEC.
upvoted 0 times
...
Dalene
11 months ago
I'm a little confused by the different options presented. I'll need to carefully analyze the graph and constraints to determine the optimal solution.
upvoted 0 times
...
Bobbye
11 months ago
Okay, let's see here. The code is querying Contacts and Accounts, and there are 10 Contacts and 5 Accounts created today. I'm thinking it might be a SOQL query limit issue, but I'll need to double-check the details.
upvoted 0 times
...
Carman
11 months ago
Hmm, I'm a bit unsure about this one. The question is asking about the best way to protect the computers, but I'm not sure if all the options are equally effective. I'll need to think it through carefully.
upvoted 0 times
...
Refugia
2 years ago
I believe restricting keywork in the IPSEC Tunnel could also be a good way to mitigate this issue.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lauryn
2 years ago
But wouldn't it be better to classify and mark duplicate sequence packets instead?
upvoted 0 times
...
Roslyn
2 years ago
I agree with the anti-replay window can help prevent duplicate sequence numbers causing trouble.
upvoted 0 times
...
Beckie
2 years ago
I think we should definitely consider the anti-replay window 4096 to mitigate this issue.
upvoted 0 times
...
Twila
2 years ago
Let's implement these changes as soon as possible to prevent any disruptions.
upvoted 0 times
...
Michell
2 years ago
Agreed, all these measures combined should improve the security of our network.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lashandra
2 years ago
It might be necessary to ensure high-priority traffic is not affected.
upvoted 0 times
...
Ahmed
2 years ago
Should we increase the QoS shape policy as well?
upvoted 0 times
...
Twila
2 years ago
That could also help in mitigating this issue.
upvoted 0 times
...
Michell
2 years ago
What about restricting keywork in IPSEC Tunnel?
upvoted 0 times
...
Lashandra
2 years ago
Yes, that would be a good additional measure.
upvoted 0 times
...
Ahmed
2 years ago
Should we also classify and mark duplicate sequence packets?
upvoted 0 times
...
Twila
2 years ago
We should apply anti-replay window 4096.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lashandra
2 years ago
What design parameter should we consider to mitigate duplicate sequence packets on IPSEC?
upvoted 0 times
Angelyn
2 years ago
C) Restrict keywork in IPSEC Tunnel.
upvoted 0 times
...
Jade
2 years ago
B) Apply anti-replay window 4096.
upvoted 0 times
...
Flo
2 years ago
A) Classify and Mark duplicate sequence packets.
upvoted 0 times
...
...

Save Cancel