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

Palo Alto Networks NetSec-Analyst Exam - Topic 3 Question 15 Discussion

Posted by Wendell on Jun 27, 2026 at 11:36 AM

Based on the image below, what is a risk associated with this configuration?

Suggested Answer: A

Comprehensive and Detailed 150 to 250 words of Explanation From Palo Alto Networks Network Security Analyst Knowledge:

In the provided image, the Decryption Profile is configured with a Min Version of TLSv1.3. While this represents a high security posture, it introduces a significant operational risk: compatibility issues with legacy applications or clients.

Many older operating systems, web browsers, and legacy internal applications do not support TLS 1.3. If a client or server attempts to negotiate a connection using an older, unsupported protocol version (such as TLS 1.2 or 1.1), the firewall will drop the connection because it falls below the configured minimum threshold. A Network Security Analyst must balance the need for modern encryption with the functional requirements of the network.

Option C is incorrect because disabling weak algorithms like 3DES and RC4 actually improves the security posture. Option D is incorrect because the firewall is fully capable of decrypting traffic using Perfect Forward Secrecy (PFS) if the appropriate certificates are installed. Option B is a general concern for all decryption but is not a specific risk of the versioning shown. Therefore, the most immediate risk of setting the minimum version to TLS 1.3 is the potential disruption of services for any user or system still relying on the widely-used TLS 1.2 protocol or older.


Get Premium NetSec-Analyst Questions as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF Real Exam Format Detailed Explanations Instant Access Get Your Practice Test
21 comments · newest first
NG
Nguyet 4 days ago
I think option A is a real concern. Legacy apps struggle with TLSv1.3.
PA
Paris 10 days ago
I lean towards A too. Compatibility issues can lead to major headaches.
MA
Maia 15 days ago
D sounds good, but not everyone needs PFS. It's a trade-off.
ET
Ethan 20 days ago
True, but I feel C is worse. Disabling those algorithms is crucial for security.
LE
Leonida 25 days ago
B is also risky. High resource use can slow down systems.
DA
Darnell 1 month ago
Agreed, A could break compatibility. Older systems might fail.
LY
Lynsey 1 month ago
I think A is a big concern. Legacy apps struggle with newer protocols.
CE
Celestine 1 month ago
I think A is a valid concern, but we need to move forward with security standards.
EL
Ellsworth 2 months ago
Wait, D sounds too good to be true. Can it really not be decrypted?
EV
Eve 2 months ago
C is a bit misleading, disabling weak ciphers actually improves security.
AR
Ardella 2 months ago
Totally agree with B! Performance can really take a hit.
FR
Frederic 2 months ago
A) Min Version setting of TLSv1.3 can cause compatibility issues with legacy applications or clients.
GR
Gretchen 2 months ago
Wait, D sounds too good to be true, how can it not be decrypted?
AS
Asuncion 2 months ago
C seems off, disabling weak algorithms actually improves security, right?
TE
Teri 3 months ago
B is a big deal, performance drops can really hurt user experience.
JU
Julio 3 months ago
Totally agree with A, legacy systems can be a pain!
SH
Sherell 3 months ago
A) Min Version setting of TLSv1.3 can cause compatibility issues with legacy applications or clients.
TH
Thurman 3 months ago
D sounds right because Perfect Forward Secrecy is important, but I’m not clear if "Max" really guarantees it won’t be decrypted.
JO
Joseph 3 months ago
I’m a bit confused about C; I thought disabling weak algorithms like 3DES and RC4 actually improves security, not decreases it.
MI
Miesha 3 months ago
I think B could be a concern too, especially if the authentication algorithms are resource-intensive. I’ve seen similar questions about performance issues in practice tests.
JU
Juan 4 months ago
I remember studying that TLS versions can impact compatibility, so A seems plausible, but I'm not entirely sure if it's the biggest risk.
0/2000 characters

Save Cancel