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

Palo Alto Networks PSE-StrataDC Exam - Topic 4 Question 73 Discussion

A single VM runs a web server and a DNS server A separate VM needs to access the DNS server, but is not allowed to access the web server What network control functionality is necessary to enforce this security posture'?
C) can use a port filter firewall for this requirement but not the Palo Alto Networks NGFW.
A) can use a Palo Alto Networks NGFW for this requirement, but not a port filter firewall.
B) can use either a Palo Alto Networks NGFW or a port filler firewall for this requirement.
D) can use a specialized VM with advanced threat protection for this requirement

Palo Alto Networks PSE-StrataDC Exam - Topic 4 Question 73 Discussion

Actual exam question for Palo Alto Networks's PSE-StrataDC exam
Question #: 73
Topic #: 4
[All PSE-StrataDC Questions]

A single VM runs a web server and a DNS server A separate VM needs to access the DNS server, but is not allowed to access the web server What network control functionality is necessary to enforce this security posture'?

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: C

by Rodrigo at Sep 19, 2024, 07:22 PM

Limited Time Offer

25%

Off

Get Premium PSE-StrataDC Questions as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF

Contribute your Thoughts:

0/2000 characters
Submit Cancel
Eliseo
10 months ago
I agree, NGFW is the way to go for this setup.
upvoted 0 times
...
Regenia
10 months ago
Wait, can a port filter really do that? Sounds sketchy!
upvoted 0 times
...
Truman
10 months ago
Not sure about that, I thought both options were valid.
upvoted 0 times
...
Devon
11 months ago
I think a port filter could work too, right?
upvoted 0 times
...
Francesco
11 months ago
A Palo Alto NGFW can definitely handle that!
upvoted 0 times
...
Chantell
11 months ago
I'm a bit confused; can a port filter really enforce such specific access rules? I thought it was more basic than that.
upvoted 0 times
...
Simona
11 months ago
I feel like we had a practice question similar to this, and it leaned towards using a Palo Alto NGFW for better security.
upvoted 0 times
...
Cortney
11 months ago
I think we discussed how NGFWs can provide more granular control, so maybe option A is the right choice?
upvoted 0 times
...
Sage
11 months ago
I remember studying about firewalls, but I'm not sure if a port filter can handle this specific scenario.
upvoted 0 times
...
Timothy
11 months ago
This is a tricky one. I'm not super familiar with the Palo Alto NGFW, so I'm hesitant to choose that option. But a port filter firewall sounds like it could do the job. I'll need to review my network security concepts to make sure I'm picking the right answer.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lizbeth
12 months ago
Okay, I've got a strategy for this. The key is understanding the security requirements - we need to allow the separate VM to access the DNS server, but not the web server. So a firewall that can selectively filter traffic based on ports or protocols would be the way to go. I'm leaning towards option B.
upvoted 0 times
...
Shala
12 months ago
Hmm, I'm a bit unsure about this one. The question is asking about the necessary network control functionality, but it's not totally clear to me what the difference is between the Palo Alto NGFW and a port filter firewall. I'll need to think this through carefully.
upvoted 0 times
...
Sherly
12 months ago
This seems like a pretty straightforward network security question. I think I'll go with option B - a Palo Alto Networks NGFW or a port filter firewall should both work to enforce the required security posture.
upvoted 0 times
...
Edelmira
12 months ago
This seems straightforward. If we're storing primes on local disk, we'll want to give each SolrServer the appropriate configuration to handle that data. I'll make sure to allocate enough local storage for the primes.
upvoted 0 times
...
Raylene
2 years ago
Seriously, who even needs a web server these days? Just run everything on the DNS server and call it a day. Problem solved! (But in all seriousness, I think B is the right answer.)
upvoted 0 times
Gregg
2 years ago
I think B is the right answer too, using either a Palo Alto Networks NGFW or a port filler firewall.
upvoted 0 times
...
Alyce
2 years ago
But for security reasons, it's important to separate the web server from the DNS server.
upvoted 0 times
...
Karol
2 years ago
I agree, running everything on the DNS server would simplify things.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Van
2 years ago
I'd say B is the correct answer. Either a port filter firewall or a Palo Alto NGFW would work, but why go for the fancy option when the simple one will do the job?
upvoted 0 times
Vashti
2 years ago
Yeah, keeping it simple with a port filter firewall makes sense.
upvoted 0 times
...
Santos
2 years ago
I think so too, no need to overcomplicate things.
upvoted 0 times
...
Paola
2 years ago
I agree, B seems like the most practical choice.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Wilson
2 years ago
Option B, for sure. Why spend more on a Palo Alto NGFW when a good old-fashioned port filter firewall can do the trick? Gotta watch that budget, am I right?
upvoted 0 times
...
Talia
2 years ago
I'm going with option C. A port filter firewall is the right tool for the job here, and I don't think the Palo Alto NGFW is necessary.
upvoted 0 times
Dong
2 years ago
Option D seems interesting, but I'm not sure if a specialized VM is necessary for this specific requirement.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lea
2 years ago
I'm leaning towards option A, I believe the Palo Alto Networks NGFW would provide the best security for this scenario.
upvoted 0 times
...
Paola
2 years ago
I think option B could also work, as it gives you more flexibility in choosing the firewall.
upvoted 0 times
...
Elvera
2 years ago
I agree, option C seems like the most appropriate choice.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Vallie
2 years ago
I see your point, but I think option C might be the most cost-effective solution since a port filter firewall can also enforce the security posture.
upvoted 0 times
...
Edelmira
2 years ago
Hmm, I think option B is the way to go. A port filter firewall should be able to handle this requirement just fine, and the Palo Alto Networks NGFW is overkill in my opinion.
upvoted 0 times
Nobuko
2 years ago
It's better to go with the simpler option of a port filter firewall.
upvoted 0 times
...
Anabel
2 years ago
Yeah, the Palo Alto Networks NGFW might be too much for just separating access to the web server and DNS server.
upvoted 0 times
...
Eric
2 years ago
I think using a Palo Alto Networks NGFW might be too much for this specific requirement.
upvoted 0 times
...
Scarlet
2 years ago
I think a port filter firewall would be sufficient for this scenario.
upvoted 0 times
...
Yan
2 years ago
I agree, option B seems like the most practical choice.
upvoted 0 times
...
Zana
2 years ago
Yeah, a port filter firewall should be sufficient for this scenario.
upvoted 0 times
...
Stevie
2 years ago
I agree, option B seems like the most practical choice.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Katheryn
2 years ago
I disagree, I believe option B is also valid as it gives the flexibility to use either a Palo Alto Networks NGFW or a port filter firewall.
upvoted 0 times
...
Slyvia
2 years ago
I think option A is the best choice because a Palo Alto Networks NGFW can provide the necessary network control functionality.
upvoted 0 times
...

Save Cancel