Free Practice Questions for Fortinet FCSS_SOC_AN-7.4 Exam

Understanding the Playbook Configuration:

The "Malicious File Detect" playbook is designed to create an incident when a malicious file detection event is triggered.

The playbook includes tasks such asAttach_Data_To_Incident,Create Incident, andGet Events.

Analyzing the Playbook Execution:

The exhibit shows that theCreate Incidenttask has failed, and theAttach_Data_To_Incidenttask has also failed.

TheGet Eventstask succeeded, indicating that it was able to retrieve event data.

Reviewing Raw Logs:

The raw logs indicate an error related to parsing input in theincident_operator.pyfile.

The error traceback suggests that the task was expecting a specific input format (likely a name or number) but received an incorrect data format.

Identifying the Source of the Failure:

TheCreate Incidenttask failure is the root cause since it did not proceed correctly due to incorrect input format.

TheAttach_Data_To_Incidenttask subsequently failed because it depends on the successful creation of an incident.

Conclusion:

The primary reason for the playbook execution failure is that theCreate Incidenttask received an incorrect data format, which was not a name or number as expected.

References:

Fortinet Documentation on Playbook and Task Configuration.

Error handling and debugging practices in playbook execution.

Understanding the Requirements:

The objective is to create an incident and generate a report based on malicious attachment events detected by FortiAnalyzer from FortiSandbox analysis.

The endpoint hosts are protected by FortiClient EMS, which is integrated with FortiSandbox. All logs are sent to FortiAnalyzer.

Key Components:

FortiAnalyzer: Centralized logging and analysis for Fortinet devices.

FortiSandbox: Advanced threat protection system that analyzes suspicious files and URLs.

FortiClient EMS: Endpoint management system that integrates with FortiSandbox for endpoint protection.

Playbook Analysis:

The playbook in the exhibit consists of three main actions:GET_EVENTS,RUN_REPORT, andCREATE_INCIDENT.

EVENT_TRIGGER: Starts the playbook when an event occurs.

GET_EVENTS: Fetches relevant events.

RUN_REPORT: Generates a report based on the events.

CREATE_INCIDENT: Creates an incident in the incident management system.

Selecting the Correct Connector:

The correct connector should allow fetching events related to malicious attachments analyzed by FortiSandbox and facilitate integration with FortiAnalyzer.

Connector Options:

FortiSandbox Connector:

Directly integrates with FortiSandbox to fetch analysis results and events related to malicious attachments.

Best suited for getting detailed sandbox analysis results.

Selected as it is directly related to the requirement of handling FortiSandbox analysis events.

FortiClient EMS Connector:

Used for managing endpoint security and integrating with endpoint logs.

Not directly related to fetching sandbox analysis events.

Not selected as it is not directly related to the sandbox analysis events.

FortiMail Connector:

Used for email security and handling email-related logs and events.

Not applicable for sandbox analysis events.

Not selected as it does not relate to the sandbox analysis.

Local Connector:

Handles local events within FortiAnalyzer itself.

Might not be specific enough for fetching detailed sandbox analysis results.

Not selected as it may not provide the required integration with FortiSandbox.

Implementation Steps:

Step 1: Ensure FortiSandbox is configured to send analysis results to FortiAnalyzer.

Step 2: Use the FortiSandbox connector in the playbook to fetch events related to malicious attachments.

Step 3: Configure theGET_EVENTSaction to use the FortiSandbox connector.

Step 4: Set up theRUN_REPORTandCREATE_INCIDENTactions based on the fetched events.

References:

Fortinet Documentation on FortiSandbox Integration FortiSandbox Integration Guide

Fortinet Documentation on FortiAnalyzer Event Handling FortiAnalyzer Administration Guide

By using the FortiSandbox connector, the analyst can ensure that the playbook accurately fetches events based on FortiSandbox analysis and generates the required incident and report.

Understanding the MITRE ATT&CK Tactics:

The MITRE ATT&CK framework categorizes various tactics and techniques used by adversaries to achieve their objectives.

Tactics represent the objectives of an attack, while techniques represent how those objectives are achieved.

Analyzing the Incident Report:

Phishing Email Campaign:This tactic is commonly used for gaining initial access to a system.

Malicious Link and RAT Download:Clicking a malicious link and downloading a RAT is indicative of establishing initial access.

Remote Access Trojan (RAT):Once installed, the RAT allows attackers to maintain access over an extended period, which is a persistence tactic.

Mapping to MITRE ATT&CK Tactics:

Initial Access:

This tactic covers techniques used to gain an initial foothold within a network.

Techniques include phishing and exploiting external remote services.

The phishing campaign and malicious link click fit this category.

Persistence:

This tactic includes methods that adversaries use to maintain their foothold.

Techniques include installing malware that can survive reboots and persist on the system.

The RAT provides persistent remote access, fitting this tactic.

Exclusions:

Defense Evasion:

This involves techniques to avoid detection and evade defenses.

While potentially relevant in a broader context, the incident report does not specifically describe actions taken to evade defenses.

Lateral Movement:

This involves moving through the network to other systems.

The report does not indicate actions beyond initial access and maintaining that access.

Conclusion:

The incident report captures the tactics ofInitial AccessandPersistence.

References:

MITRE ATT&CK Framework documentation on Initial Access and Persistence tactics.

Incident analysis and mapping to MITRE ATT&CK tactics.

Understanding FortiAnalyzer Data Policy and Disk Utilization:

FortiAnalyzer uses data policies to manage log storage, retention, and disk utilization.

The Data Policy section indicates how long logs are kept for analytics and archive purposes.

The Disk Utilization section specifies the allocated disk space and the proportions used for analytics and archive, as well as when alerts should be triggered based on disk usage.

Analyzing the Provided Exhibit:

Keep Logs for Analytics:60 Days

Keep Logs for Archive:120 Days

Disk Allocation:300 GB (with a maximum of 441 GB available)

Analytics: Archive Ratio:30% : 70%

Alert and Delete When Usage Reaches:90%

Potential Problems Identification:

Disk Space Allocation:The allocated disk space is 300 GB out of a possible 441 GB, which might not be insufficient if the log volume is high, but it is not the primary concern based on the given data.

Analytics-to-Archive Ratio:The ratio of 30% for analytics and 70% for archive is unconventional. Typically, a higher percentage is allocated for analytics since real-time or recent data analysis is often prioritized. A common configuration might be a 70% analytics and 30% archive ratio. The misconfigured ratio can lead to insufficient space for analytics, causing issues with real-time monitoring and analysis.

Retention Periods:While the retention periods could be seen as lengthy, they are not necessarily indicative of a problem without knowing the specific log volume and compliance requirements. The length of these periods can vary based on organizational needs and legal requirements.

Conclusion:

Based on the analysis, the primary issue observed is theanalytics-to-archive ratiobeing misconfigured. This misconfiguration can significantly impact the effectiveness of the FortiAnalyzer in real-time log analysis, potentially leading to delayed threat detection and response.

References:

Fortinet Documentation on FortiAnalyzer Data Policies and Disk Management.

Best Practices for FortiAnalyzer Log Management and Disk Utilization.

Understanding the MITRE ATT&CK Framework:

The MITRE ATT&CK framework is a comprehensive matrix of tactics and techniques used by adversaries to achieve their objectives.

It is widely used for understanding adversary behavior, improving defense strategies, and conducting security assessments.

Analyzing the Options:

Option A:The framework provides detailed technical descriptions of adversary activities, including specific techniques and subtechniques.

Option B:The framework includes information about mitigations and detections for each technique and subtechnique, providing comprehensive guidance.

Option C:MITRE ATT&CK covers a wide range of attack vectors, including those targeting user endpoints, network devices, and servers.

Option D:Some techniques or subtechniques do indeed fall under multiple tactics, reflecting the complex nature of adversary activities that can serve different objectives.

Conclusion:

The statement that best describes the MITRE ATT&CK framework is that it contains some techniques or subtechniques that fall under more than one tactic.

References:

MITRE ATT&CK Framework Documentation.

Security Best Practices and Threat Intelligence Reports Utilizing MITRE ATT&CK.

NIST Cybersecurity Framework Overview:

The NIST Cybersecurity Framework provides a structured approach for managing and mitigating cybersecurity risks. Incident handling is divided into several phases to systematically address and resolve incidents.

Incident Handling Phases:

Preparation: Establishing and maintaining an incident response capability.

Detection and Analysis: Identifying and investigating suspicious activities to confirm an incident.

Containment, Eradication, and Recovery:

Containment: Limiting the impact of the incident.

Eradication: Removing the root cause of the incident.

Recovery: Restoring systems to normal operation.

Containment Phase:

The primary goal of the containment phase is to prevent the incident from spreading and causing further damage.

Quarantining a Compromised Host:

Quarantining involves isolating the compromised host from the rest of the network to prevent adversaries from moving laterally and causing more harm.

Techniques include network segmentation, disabling network interfaces, and applying access controls.

Understanding Automation Processes in FortiAnalyzer:

FortiAnalyzer can automate responses to detected security events, such as running commands on FortiGate devices.

Analyzing the Customer Requirement:

The customer wants to run a CLI command on FortiGate to block predefined URLs when a botnet C&C server IP is detected.

This requires an automated response triggered by a specific event.

Evaluating the Options:

Option A:Playbooks orchestrate complex workflows but are not typically used for direct event-triggered automation processes.

Option B:Data selectors filter logs based on criteria but do not initiate automation processes.

Option C:Event handlers can be configured to detect specific events (such as detecting a botnet C&C server IP) and trigger automation stitches to execute predefined actions.

Option D:Connectors facilitate communication between FortiAnalyzer and other systems but are not the primary mechanism for initiating automation based on log events.

Conclusion:

To start the automation process when a botnet C&C server IP is detected, you must use anEvent handlerin FortiAnalyzer.

References:

Fortinet Documentation on Event Handlers and Automation Stitches in FortiAnalyzer.

Best Practices for Configuring Automated Responses in FortiAnalyzer.

Understanding the Playbook and its Components:

The exhibit shows the status of a playbook named "DOS attack" and its associated tasks.

The playbook is designed to execute a series of tasks upon detecting a DoS attack event.

Analysis of Playbook Tasks:

Attach_Data_To_Incident:Task ID placeholder_8fab0102, status is "upstream_failed," meaning it did not execute properly due to a previous task's failure.

Get Events:Task ID placeholder_fa2a573c, status is "success."

Create SMTP Enumeration incident:Task ID placeholder_3db75c0a, status is "failed."

Reviewing Raw Logs:

The error log shows aValueError: invalid literal for int() with base 10: '10.200.200.100'.

This error indicates that the task attempted to convert a string (the IP address '10.200.200.100') to an integer, which is not possible.

Identifying the Source of the Error:

The error occurs in the file "incident_operator.py," specifically in theexecutemethod.

This suggests that the task "Create SMTP Enumeration incident" is the one causing the issue because it failed to process the data type correctly.

Conclusion:

The failure of the playbook is due to the "Create SMTP Enumeration incident" task receiving a string value (an IP address) when it expects an integer value. This mismatch in data types leads to the error.

References:

Fortinet Documentation on Playbook and Task Configuration.

Python error handling documentation for understandingValueError.