I think I remember that pinned certificates require special handling, but I'm not sure if that means we need to add them to an exception list or something else.
I'm leaning towards D. Allowing the domains used by the pinned certificate apps in an inline policy could be the right solution, but I'm not 100% confident.
Option A seems like the way to go here. Adding an exception to the steering configuration is the best approach for dealing with pinned certificate traffic.
I think the correct answer is B. The domains used by certificate-pinned applications should be added to the authentication bypass list to allow that traffic to pass through.
I feel like this question is similar to one we practiced in class, but the numbers are different. I hope I remember how to calculate the total gross income correctly.
This looks like a straightforward question about Cisco's product lines. I should be able to answer this based on my knowledge of Cisco's networking solutions.
You know, this reminds me of the time I had to deal with a legacy application that used a hardcoded SSL certificate. Talk about a nightmare! I ended up just throwing the whole thing in the trash and starting over. But I digress, I think the best solution here is to add an exception to the steering config.
Blocking the traffic with pinned certificates is just going to cause a lot of headaches for the end users. Why not just allow the domains in an inline policy? That way, we can still inspect the traffic and maintain control without disrupting the applications.
I disagree. I think the best approach is to add the domains used by the certificate-pinned applications to the authentication bypass list. That way, we don't have to worry about the pinned certificates at all, and the traffic can flow freely.
This is a tricky one. The correct answer really depends on how the organization wants to handle certificate-pinned traffic. Personally, I think adding an exception to the steering configuration makes the most sense, as it allows the traffic to flow while still maintaining security controls.
Timothy
3 months agoTonja
3 months agoChau
3 months agoEffie
4 months agoJaclyn
4 months agoGabriele
4 months agoEarleen
4 months agoParis
4 months agoBenedict
5 months agoCasie
5 months agoLaurene
5 months agoCelestina
5 months agoRosina
5 months agoFlorinda
5 months agoTegan
5 months agoDelisa
5 months agoJonelle
5 months agoNoah
2 years agoChanel
2 years agoIsadora
2 years agoMartin
2 years agoRose
2 years agoSlyvia
2 years agoHildred
2 years agoJeniffer
2 years agoRoxanne
2 years agoSantos
2 years agoJerry
2 years agoBrittni
2 years agoVi
2 years agoMarjory
2 years agoJohnna
2 years agoMadonna
2 years agoKarma
2 years ago