HPE6-A78 HP Aruba Certified Network Security Associate Exam Free Practice Exam Questions (2025 Updated)

The ArubaOS firewall is a stateful firewall, meaning that it can track the state of active sessions and can make decisions based on the context of the traffic. This stateful inspection capability allows it to automatically allow return traffic for sessions that it has permitted, thereby enabling seamless two-way communication for authorized users while maintaining the security posture of the network.

WPA3-Enterprise enhances network security over WPA2-Enterprise through several improvements, one of which is the ability to operate in CNSA (Commercial National Security Algorithm) mode. This mode mandates the use of secure cryptographic algorithms during the 802.11 association process, ensuring that all communications are highly secure. The CNSA suite provides stronger encryption standards designed to protect sensitive government, military, and industrial communications. Unlike WPA2, WPA3's CNSA mode uses stronger cryptographic primitives, such as AES-256 in Galois/Counter Mode (GCM) for encryption and SHA-384 for hashing, which are not standard in WPA2-Enterprise.

Social engineering in the context of network security refers to the techniques used by hackers to manipulate individuals into breaking normal security procedures and best practices to gain unauthorized access to systems, networks, or physical locations, or for financial gain. Hackers use various forms of deception to trick employees into handing over confidential or personal information that can be used for fraudulent purposes. This definition encompasses phishing attacks, pretexting, baiting, and other manipulative techniques designed to exploit human psychology. Unlike other hacking methods that rely on technical means, social engineering targets the human element of security. References to social engineering, its methods, and defense strategies are commonly found in security training manuals, cybersecurity awareness programs, and authoritative resources like those from the SANS Institute or cybersecurity agencies.

The Aruba ClearPass Device Insight Analyzer plays a crucial role within the Device Insight architecture by residing in the cloud and applying machine learning and supervised crowdsourcing to the metadata sent by Collectors. This component of the architecture is responsible for analyzing vast amounts of data collected from the network to identify and classify devices accurately. By utilizing machine learning algorithms and crowdsourced input, the Device Insight Analyzer enhances the accuracy of device detection and classification, thereby improving the overall security and management of the network.

The AOS Security Dashboard in an AOS-8 solution (Mobility Controllers or Mobility Master) provides a client list through its Wireless Intrusion Prevention (WIP) system, showing the classification of clients and the APs they are connected to. The goal is to identify clients that belong to the company (Authorized clients) and have connected to devices that might belong to hackers (rogue or suspected rogue APs).

Client Classification:

Authorized: A client that has successfully authenticated to an authorized AP and is part of the company’s network (e.g., an employee device).

Interfering: A client that is not authenticated to the company’s network and is considered external or potentially malicious.

AP Classification:

Authorized: An AP that is part of the company’s network and managed by the MC.

Suspected Rogue: An AP that is not authorized and is suspected of being malicious, often because it exhibits suspicious behavior (e.g., a BSSID close to an authorized AP, indicating potential spoofing).

Neighbor: An AP that is not part of the company’s network but is not connected to the wired network (e.g., a nearby AP from another organization).

Interfering: An AP that is not part of the company’s network and may be causing interference, but is not necessarily malicious.

The requirement is to find a client that is Authorized (belongs to the company) and connected to a Suspected Rogue AP (might belong to hackers).

Option A: MAC address: d8:50:e6:f3:6d:a4; Client Classification: Authorized; AP Classification: Suspected RogueThis client is classified as "Authorized," meaning it belongs to the company, and it is connected to a "Suspected Rogue" AP, which might belong to hackers. This matches the requirement perfectly.

Option B: MAC address: d8:50:e6:f3:6e:c5; Client Classification: Interfering; AP Classification: NeighborThis client is "Interfering" (not a company client) and connected to a "Neighbor" AP, which is not considered a hacker’s device (it’s just a nearby AP).

Option C: MAC address: d8:50:e6:f3:6e:60; Client Classification: Interfering; AP Classification: InterferingThis client is "Interfering" (not a company client) and connected to an "Interfering" AP, which is not necessarily a hacker’s device (it may just be causing interference).

Option D: MAC address: d8:50:e6:f3:70:ab; Client Classification: Interfering; AP Classification: Suspected RogueThis client is "Interfering" (not a company client), although it is connected to a "Suspected Rogue" AP. It does not meet the requirement of being a company client.

The HPE Aruba Networking AOS-8 8.11 User Guide states:

"The Security Dashboard’s client list in ArubaOS shows the classification of each client and the AP it is connected to. An ‘Authorized’ client is one that has successfully authenticated to an authorized AP and is part of the company’s network. A ‘Suspected Rogue’ AP is an unauthorized AP that exhibits suspicious behavior, such as a BSSID close to an authorized AP, indicating potential spoofing by a hacker. To identify security risks, look for authorized clients connected to suspected rogue APs, as this may indicate a company device has connected to a malicious AP." (Page 415, Security Dashboard Section)

Additionally, the HPE Aruba Networking Security Guide notes:

"WIP classifies clients as ‘Authorized’ if they have authenticated to an authorized AP managed by the controller. A ‘Suspected Rogue’ AP is a potential threat, as it may be attempting to mimic a legitimate AP to lure clients. Identifying authorized clients connected to suspected rogue APs is critical for detecting potential attacks, such as man-in-the-middle attempts by hackers." (Page 78, WIP Classifications Section)

The TPM (Trusted Platform Module) is a hardware-based security feature that can provide various security functions, one of which includes secure boot. Secure boot is a process where the TPM ensures that the device boots using only software that is trusted by the manufacturer. If the OS has been tampered with or infected with malware, the secure boot process can detect this and prevent the system from loading the compromised OS.

To differentiate access control for faculty and students, the best approach is to use roles. By creating two roles - "faculty" and "student" - and applying the appropriate firewall policies to each, the university can enforce different access rules for each group. This is more efficient than managing multiple VLANs or WLANs because it allows for role-based access control, which is directly tied to user identity rather than just IP addresses or the network they are connected to.QUESTION NO: 105

The monitoring admin has asked you to set up an ArubaOS-Switch to meet these criteria:

• Send logs to a SIEM Syslog server at 10.4.13.15 at the standard UDP port (514)

• Send a log for all events at the "warning" level or above

The switch did not have any "logging" configuration on it. You then entered this command:

ArubaOS-Switch(config)# logging 10.4.13.15 udp

What should you do to finish configuring to the requirements?

A. Add categories (system-modules) at the global level.

B. Specify "warning" as the global level.

C. Ask for the Syslog password and configure it on the switch.

D. Configure logging as a debug destination.

Answer: B

To set up an ArubaOS-Switch to send logs to a SIEM syslog server at the specified criteria, you would need to specify the level of events that should be logged. Since the requirement is to log all events at the "warning" level or above, you should specify the syslog level after the logging server IP and port. The command should look like this:

ArubaOS-Switch(config)# logging 10.4.13.15 ArubaOS-Switch(config)# logging trap warning

This would set up the switch to send logs to the syslog server at the IP address 10.4.13.15 using the default UDP port (514), for all events at the "warning" level or above.

Aruba ClearPass Device Insight offers a significant benefit by providing highly accurate endpoint classification. This feature is particularly useful in complex environments with a wide variety of device types, including IoT devices. Accurate device classification allows network administrators to better understand the nature and behavior of devices on their network, which is crucial for implementing appropriate security policies and ensuring network performance and security.

The scenario involves AOS-CX switches in a two-tier topology (access and core layers) using OSPF routing at the core. The goal is to prevent ARP poisoning attacks on user VLANs at the access layer switches, where end-user devices connect. ARP poisoning (also known as ARP spoofing) is an attack where a malicious device sends fake ARP messages to associate its MAC address with the IP address of another device (e.g., the default gateway), allowing the attacker to intercept traffic.

ARP Inspection (Dynamic ARP Inspection, DAI): This feature prevents ARP poisoning by validating ARP packets against a trusted database of IP-to-MAC bindings. On AOS-CX switches, ARP inspection uses the DHCP snooping binding table to verify that ARP messages come from legitimate devices. If an ARP packet does not match the binding table, it is dropped.

DHCPv4 Snooping: This feature protects against rogue DHCP servers and builds a binding table of legitimate IP-to-MAC mappings by snooping DHCP traffic. The binding table is used by ARP inspection to validate ARP packets. DHCP snooping must be enabled before ARP inspection can function effectively, as it provides the trusted data for validation.

Option A, "ARP inspection," is correct. ARP inspection (DAI) directly prevents ARP poisoning by ensuring that ARP packets are legitimate, making it a key technology for this purpose.

Option B, "OSPF passive interface," is incorrect. OSPF passive interface is used to prevent OSPF from sending routing updates on specific interfaces, typically to reduce routing protocol traffic on user-facing interfaces. It does not prevent ARP poisoning, which is a Layer 2 attack.

Option C, "BPDU guard (protection)," is incorrect. BPDU guard protects against spanning tree protocol (STP) attacks by disabling a port if it receives BPDUs (e.g., from an unauthorized switch). It does not address ARP poisoning, which is unrelated to STP.

Option D, "DHCPv4 snooping," is correct. DHCP snooping is a prerequisite for ARP inspection, as it builds the binding table used to validate ARP packets. It also protects against rogue DHCP servers, which can indirectly contribute to ARP poisoning by assigning incorrect IP addresses.

Option E, "BPDU filtering," is incorrect. BPDU filtering prevents a port from sending or receiving BPDUs, which can be used to protect against STP attacks, but it does not prevent ARP poisoning.

The HPE Aruba Networking AOS-CX 10.12 Security Guide states:

"To prevent ARP poisoning attacks on user VLANs, enable Dynamic ARP Inspection (DAI) on access layer switches. DAI validates ARP packets against the DHCP snooping binding table to ensure they come from legitimate devices. Use the command ip arp inspection vlan to enable DAI on the specified VLANs. DHCP snooping must be enabled first with dhcp-snooping and dhcp-snooping vlan to build the binding table used by DAI." (Page 145, ARP Inspection and DHCP Snooping Section)

Additionally, the guide notes:

"DHCP snooping and ARP inspection work together to protect against Layer 2 attacks like ARP poisoning. DHCP snooping builds a trusted database of IP-to-MAC bindings, which ARP inspection uses to filter out malicious ARP packets." (Page 146, Best Practices Section)

In an HPE Aruba Networking AOS-8 solution, the Wireless Intrusion Prevention (WIP) system is used to detect and classify rogue Access Points (APs). When a rogue AP is detected, the AOS system provides various pieces of information about the detected radio, such as the SSID, BSSID, match method, match type, confidence level, and the devices that detected the rogue AP. The goal is to locate the physical rogue device, which requires identifying its approximate location in the network environment.

Option A, "The detecting devices," is correct. The "detecting devices" refer to the authorized APs or radios that detected the rogue AP’s signal. This information is critical for locating the rogue device because it provides the physical locations of the detecting APs. By knowing which APs detected the rogue AP and their signal strength (RSSI) readings, you can triangulate the approximate location of the rogue AP. For example, if AP-1 in Building A and AP-2 in Building B both detect the rogue AP, and AP-1 reports a stronger signal, the rogue AP is likely closer to AP-1 in Building A.

Option B, "The match method," is incorrect. The match method (e.g., "Plus one," "Eth-Wired-Mac-Table") indicates how the rogue AP was classified (e.g., based on a BSSID close to a known MAC or its presence on the wired network). While this helps understand why the AP was classified as rogue, it does not directly help locate the physical device.

Option C, "The confidence level," is incorrect. The confidence level indicates the likelihood that the AP is correctly classified as rogue (e.g., 90% confidence). This is useful for assessing the reliability of the classification but does not provide location information.

Option D, "The match type," is incorrect. The match type (e.g., "Rogue," "Suspected Rogue") specifies the category of the classification. Like the match method, it helps understand the classification but does not aid in physically locating the device.

The HPE Aruba Networking AOS-8 8.11 User Guide states:

"When a rogue AP is detected by the Wireless Intrusion Prevention (WIP) system, the ‘detecting devices’ information lists the authorized APs or radios that detected the rogue AP’s signal. This is the most useful information for locating the rogue device, as it provides the physical locations of the detecting APs. By analyzing the signal strength (RSSI) reported by each detecting device, you can triangulate the approximate location of the rogue AP. For example, if AP-1 and AP-2 detect the rogue AP, and AP-1 reports a higher RSSI, the rogue AP is likely closer to AP-1." (Page 416, Rogue AP Detection Section)

Additionally, the HPE Aruba Networking Security Guide notes:

"To locate a rogue AP, use the ‘detecting devices’ information in the AOS Detected Radios page. This lists the APs that detected the rogue AP, along with signal strength data, enabling triangulation to pinpoint the rogue device’s location." (Page 80, Locating Rogue APs Section)

Protected Management Frames (PMF), also known as Management Frame Protection (MFP), is designed to protect clients from denial-of-service (DoS) attacks that involve forged de-authentication and disassociation frames. These attacks can disconnect legitimate clients from the network. PMF provides a way to authenticate these management frames, ensuring that they are not forged, thus enhancing the security of the wireless network.

An example of a social engineering attack is described in option A, where an email is used to impersonate a bank and deceive users into entering their bank login information on a counterfeit website. Social engineering attacks exploit human psychology rather than technical hacking techniques to gain access to systems, data, or personal information. These attacks often involve tricking people into breaking normal security procedures. The other options describe different types of technical attacks that do not primarily rely on manipulating individuals through deceptive personal interactions.

For following Aruba best security practices, the setting you should change is to disable local authentication. When integrating with an external RADIUS server like ClearPass Policy Manager (CPPM) for authenticating administrative access to the Mobility Controller (MC), it is a best practice to rely on the external server rather than the local user database. This practice not only centralizes the management of user roles and access but also enhances security by leveraging CPPM's advanced authentication mechanisms.

The scenario involves an AOS-CX switch that needs to send RADIUS debug messages to a central SIEM server at 10.5.15.6. The switch has already been configured to send logs to the SIEM server with the command logging 10.5.15.6, and the command debug radius all has been entered to enable RADIUS debugging.

Debug Command: The debug radius all command enables debugging for all RADIUS-related events on the AOS-CX switch, generating detailed debug messages for RADIUS authentication, accounting, and other operations.

Debug Destination: Debug messages on AOS-CX switches can be sent to various destinations, such as the console, a file, the debug buffer, or a Syslog server. The logging 10.5.15.6 command indicates that the switch is configured to send logs to a Syslog server at 10.5.15.6 (using UDP port 514 by default, unless specified otherwise).

Option D, "syslog," is correct. To send RADIUS debug messages to the SIEM server, the debug destination must be set to "syslog," as the SIEM server is already defined as a Syslog destination with logging 10.5.15.6. The command to set the debug destination to Syslog is debug destination syslog, which ensures that the RADIUS debug messages are sent to the configured Syslog server (10.5.15.6).

Option A, "file," is incorrect. Sending debug messages to a file (e.g., using debug destination file) stores the messages on the switch’s filesystem, not on the SIEM server.

Option B, "console," is incorrect. Sending debug messages to the console (e.g., using debug destination console) displays them on the switch’s console session, not on the SIEM server.

Option C, "buffer," is incorrect. Sending debug messages to the buffer (e.g., using debug destination buffer) stores them in the switch’s debug buffer, which can be viewed with show debug buffer, but does not send them to the SIEM server.

The HPE Aruba Networking AOS-CX 10.12 System Management Guide states:

"To send debug messages, such as RADIUS debug messages, to a central SIEM server, first configure the Syslog server with the logging command (e.g., logging 10.5.15.6). Then, enable the desired debug with a command like debug radius all, and set the debug destination to Syslog using debug destination syslog. This ensures that all debug messages are sent to the configured Syslog server for centralized logging." (Page 92, Debug Logging Section)

Additionally, the HPE Aruba Networking AOS-CX 10.12 Security Guide notes:

"RADIUS debug messages can be sent to a Syslog server for centralized monitoring. After enabling RADIUS debugging with debug radius all, use debug destination syslog to send the messages to the Syslog server configured with the logging command, such as a SIEM server at 10.5.15.6." (Page 152, RADIUS Debugging Section)

In the context of ArubaOS Wireless Intrusion Prevention System (WIP), an authorized client is defined as a client that has successfully authenticated to an authorized Access Point (AP) and has passed encrypted traffic. This ensures that only clients which have been verified and authenticated according to the network's security policies are allowed to access network resources. Authentication typically involves credentials that are validated by a server, confirming the client's right to access the network securely.

HPE Aruba Networking ClearPass OnGuard: This is a component of the ClearPass Policy Manager platform specifically designed for endpoint posture assessment and health checks. It can identify and classify a wide range of devices connecting to the network, including traditional endpoints, mobile devices, and importantly, IoT devices. It analyzes device attributes and behaviors to determine their type and security posture.

Let's look at why the other options are less suitable for this specific requirement:

HPE Aruba Networking EdgeConnect SD-WAN: This solution focuses on optimizing wide area network (WAN) connectivity, improving application performance, and providing secure branch-to-branch and branch-to-cloud connections. While it can identify traffic from different devices, its primary function isn't detailed device classification at the network access layer.

HPE Aruba Networking Central: This is a cloud-based network management platform that provides visibility, configuration, and management for Aruba network devices (APs, switches, gateways). While it offers insights into connected devices, its core function isn't the deep classification of diverse endpoint types like IoT devices.

HPE Aruba Networking ClearPass Onboard: This component of ClearPass Policy Manager focuses on simplifying the secure onboarding of personal or unmanaged devices (BYOD). While it involves device identification during the onboarding process, its primary goal isn't continuous and comprehensive classification of all device types, especially the detailed classification needed for diverse IoT devices.

Therefore, HPE Aruba Networking ClearPass OnGuard is the most appropriate solution for classifying a wide range of devices, including IoT devices, within an AOS-10 network infrastructure.

The ArubaOS Security Dashboard, part of the AOS-8 architecture (Mobility Controllers or Mobility Master), provides visibility into wireless clients and access points (APs) through its Wireless Intrusion Prevention (WIP) system. The goal is to identify clients that belong to the company (i.e., authorized clients) and have connected to devices that might belong to hackers (i.e., rogue APs).

Client Classification:

Authorized: A client that has successfully authenticated to an authorized AP and is recognized as part of the company’s network (e.g., an employee device).

Interfering: A client that is not authenticated to the company’s network and is considered external or potentially malicious.

AP Classification:

Authorized: An AP that is part of the company’s network and managed by the MC/MM.

Rogue: An AP that is not authorized and is suspected of being malicious (e.g., connected to the company’s wired network without permission).

Neighbor: An AP that is not part of the company’s network but is not connected to the wired network (e.g., a nearby AP from another organization).

The requirement is to find a client that is authorized (belongs to the company) and connected to a rogue AP (might belong to hackers).

Option A: MAC address: d8:50:e6:f3:70:ab; Client Classification: Interfering; AP Classification: RogueThis client is classified as "Interfering," meaning it does not belong to the company. Although it is connected to a rogue AP, it does not meet the requirement of being a company client.

Option B: MAC address: d8:50:e6:f3:6e:c5; Client Classification: Interfering; AP Classification: NeighborThis client is "Interfering" (not a company client) and connected to a "Neighbor" AP, which is not considered a hacker’s device (it’s just a nearby AP).

Option C: MAC address: d8:50:e6:f3:6e:60; Client Classification: Interfering; AP Classification: AuthorizedThis client is "Interfering" (not a company client) and connected to an "Authorized" AP, which is part of the company’s network, not a hacker’s device.

Option D: MAC address: d8:50:e6:f3:6d:a4; Client Classification: Authorized; AP Classification: RogueThis client is "Authorized," meaning it belongs to the company, and it is connected to a "Rogue" AP, which might belong to hackers. This matches the requirement perfectly.

The HPE Aruba Networking AOS-8 8.11 User Guide states:

"The Security Dashboard in ArubaOS provides a client list that includes the client classification and the AP classification for each client. A client classified as ‘Authorized’ has successfully authenticated to an authorized AP and is part of the company’s network. A ‘Rogue’ AP is an unauthorized AP that is suspected of being malicious, often because it is connected to the company’s wired network (e.g., detected via Eth-Wired-Mac-Table match). To identify potential security risks, look for authorized clients connected to rogue APs, as this may indicate that a company device has connected to a hacker’s AP." (Page 415, Security Dashboard Section)

Additionally, the HPE Aruba Networking Security Guide notes:

"An ‘Authorized’ client is one that has authenticated to an AP managed by the controller, typically an employee or corporate device. A ‘Rogue’ AP is classified as such if it is not authorized and poses a potential threat, such as being connected to the corporate LAN. Identifying authorized clients connected to rogue APs is critical for detecting potential man-in-the-middle attacks." (Page 78, WIP Classifications Section)

HPE Aruba Networking ClearPass Policy Manager (CPPM) uses device profiling to identify and classify endpoints on the network, enabling granular access control based on device type, OS, or other attributes. CPPM supports both passive and active profiling methods.

Option C, "CPPM can analyze settings such as TTL and time window size in endpoints' TCP traffic in order to fingerprint the OS," is correct. TCP fingerprinting is a passive profiling method used by CPPM. It involves analyzing TCP packet headers, such as the Time To Live (TTL) value and TCP window size, which vary between operating systems (e.g., Windows, Linux, macOS). CPPM captures this traffic (e.g., via mirrored traffic from a switch or controller) and matches the TCP attributes against its fingerprint database to identify the OS of the endpoint.

Option A, "CPPM can use Wireshark to actively probe devices, analyze their traffic patterns, and construct an endpoint profile," is incorrect. CPPM does not use Wireshark for profiling; Wireshark is a third-party packet analysis tool. CPPM has its own built-in profiling engine and does not rely on external tools like Wireshark for active probing.

Option B, "CPPM can use SNMP to configure Aruba switches and mobility devices to mirror client traffic to CPPM for analysis," is incorrect. While CPPM can receive mirrored traffic for profiling (e.g., via SPAN or mirror ports), it does not use SNMP to configure the mirroring. The configuration of traffic mirroring is typically done manually on the switch or controller (e.g., using a datapath mirror on an MC), not via SNMP by CPPM.

Option D, "CPPM can analyze settings such as TCP/UDP ports used for HTTP, DHCP, and DNS in endpoints' traffic to fingerprint the OS," is incorrect. While CPPM does analyze HTTP, DHCP, and DNS traffic for profiling, it does not fingerprint the OS based on TCP/UDP ports. Instead, it uses attributes like DHCP Option 55 (for DHCP fingerprinting) or HTTP User-Agent strings (for HTTP fingerprinting) to identify devices, not the ports themselves.

The HPE Aruba Networking ClearPass Policy Manager 6.11 User Guide states:

"ClearPass supports TCP fingerprinting as a passive profiling method to identify the operating system of endpoints. By analyzing TCP packet headers, such as the Time To Live (TTL) value and TCP window size, ClearPass can fingerprint the OS of a device. For example, Windows devices typically have a TTL of 128, while Linux devices often have a TTL of 64. These attributes are matched against ClearPass’s fingerprint database to classify the device." (Page 248, TCP Fingerprinting Section)

Additionally, the ClearPass Device Insight Data Sheet notes:

"ClearPass uses passive profiling techniques like TCP fingerprinting to identify device operating systems. By examining TCP attributes such as TTL and window size, ClearPass can accurately determine whether a device is running Windows, Linux, macOS, or another OS, enabling precise policy enforcement." (Page 3, Profiling Methods Section)

Based on the exhibits which seem to show RADIUS authentication and CoA logs, one can determine that CPPM (ClearPass Policy Manager) initially assigned the client to a role meant for non-profiled devices and then sent a CoA to the network access device (authenticator) once the device was categorized. This is a common workflow in network access control, where a device is first given limited access until it can be properly identified, after which appropriate access policies are applied.