Free Practice Questions for HP HPE6-A78 Exam

HPE Aruba Networking ClearPass Policy Manager (CPPM) uses endpoint classification (profiling) to identify and categorize devices on the network, enabling policy enforcement based on device type, OS, or other attributes. CPPM supports two primary profiling methods: passive and active classification.

Passive Classification: This method involves observing network traffic that endpoints send as part of their normal operation, without CPPM sending any requests to the device. Examples include DHCP fingerprinting (analyzing DHCP Option 55), HTTP User-Agent string analysis, and TCP fingerprinting (analyzing TTL and window size). Passive classification is non-intrusive and does not generate additional network traffic.

Active Classification: This method involves CPPM sending requests to the endpoint to gather information. Examples include SNMP scans (to query device details), WMI scans (for Windows devices), and SSH scans (to gather system information). Active classification is more intrusive and may require credentials or network access to the device.

Option A, "Passive classification refers exclusively to MAC OUI-based classification, while active classification refers to any other classification method," is incorrect. Passive classification includes more than just MAC OUI-based classification (e.g., DHCP fingerprinting, TCP fingerprinting). MAC OUI (Organizationally Unique Identifier) analysis is one passive method, but not the only one. Active classification specifically involves sending requests, not just "any other method."

Option B, "Passive classification classifies endpoints based on entries in dictionaries, while active classification uses admin-defined rules to classify endpoints," is incorrect. Both passive and active classification use CPPM’s fingerprint database (not "dictionaries") to match device attributes. Admin-defined rules are used for policy enforcement, not classification, and apply to both methods.

Option C, "Passive classification is only suitable for profiling endpoints in small business environments, while enterprises should use active classification exclusively," is incorrect. Passive classification is widely used in enterprises because it is non-intrusive and scalable. Active classification is often used in conjunction with passive methods to gather more detailed information, but enterprises do not use it exclusively.

Option D, "Passive classification analyzes traffic that endpoints send as part of their normal functions; active classification involves sending requests to endpoints," is correct. This accurately describes the fundamental difference between the two methods: passive classification observes existing traffic, while active classification actively queries the device.

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

"Passive classification analyzes traffic that endpoints send as part of their normal functions, such as DHCP requests, HTTP traffic, or TCP packets, without ClearPass sending any requests to the device. Examples include DHCP fingerprinting and TCP fingerprinting. Active classification involves ClearPass sending requests to the endpoint to gather information, such as SNMP scans, WMI scans, or SSH scans, which may require credentials or network access." (Page 246, Passive vs. Active Profiling Section)

Additionally, the ClearPass Device Insight Data Sheet notes:

"Passive classification observes network traffic generated by endpoints during normal operation, such as DHCP or HTTP traffic, to identify devices without generating additional traffic. Active classification, in contrast, sends requests to endpoints (e.g., SNMP or WMI scans) to gather detailed information, which can be more intrusive but provides deeper insights." (Page 3, Profiling Methods Section)

The correct approach for capturing packets from a wireless client in a WLAN that uses Tunnel forwarding mode and WPA3-Enterprise, managed by an Aruba Mobility Controller and Campus APs, is to use an Air Monitor (AM). An AM is specifically designed to capture wireless traffic "in the air," which means it listens to the wireless signals transmitted between devices and the access points. This method ensures that the capture includes all the necessary details while maintaining the integrity and security of the data as it is transmitted over the air. Using an Air Monitor helps in analyzing the raw wireless traffic before it gets encrypted or tunneled to the Mobility Controller, providing a clear view of the wireless client's activity and interactions. The information regarding the use of Air Monitors for packet capture in such environments can be found in the Aruba Network's official documentation and configuration guides for WLAN setups and security analysis.

When deploying an Aruba Instant AP in a location where users can physically access it, enhancing security for management access could involve several measures: C. Disabling the Web UI will prevent unauthorized access via the browser-based management interface, which could be a security risk if the AP is within physical reach of untrusted parties. E. Installing a CA-signed certificate helps ensure that any communication with the AP's management interface is encrypted and authenticated, preventing man-in-the-middle attacks and eavesdropping.

A man-in-the-middle (MITM) attack involves an attacker positioning themselves between a wireless client and the legitimate network to intercept or manipulate traffic. HPE Aruba Networking documentation often discusses MITM attacks in the context of wireless security threats and mitigation strategies.

Option D, "The hacker connects a device to the same wireless network as the client and responds to the client's ARP requests with the hacker device's MAC address," is correct. This describes an ARP poisoning (or ARP spoofing) attack, a common MITM technique in wireless networks. The hacker joins the same wireless network as the client (e.g., by authenticating with the same SSID and credentials). Once on the network, the hacker sends fake ARP responses to the client, associating the hacker’s MAC address with the IP address of the default gateway (or another target device). This causes the client to send traffic to the hacker’s device instead of the legitimate gateway, allowing the hacker to intercept, modify, or forward the traffic, thus performing an MITM attack.

Option A, "The hacker uses a combination of software and hardware to jam the RF band and prevent the client from connecting to any wireless networks," is incorrect. Jamming the RF band would disrupt all wireless communication, including the hacker’s ability to intercept traffic. This is a denial-of-service (DoS) attack, not an MITM attack.

Option B, "The hacker runs an NMap scan on the wireless client to find its MAC and IP address. The hacker then connects to another network and spoofs those addresses," is incorrect. NMap scans are used for network discovery and port scanning, not for implementing an MITM attack. Spoofing MAC and IP addresses on another network does not position the hacker to intercept the client’s traffic on the original network.

Option C, "The hacker uses spear-phishing to probe for the IP addresses that the client is attempting to reach. The hacker device then spoofs those IP addresses," is incorrect. Spear-phishing is a delivery method for malware or credentials theft, not a direct method for implementing an MITM attack. Spoofing IP addresses alone does not allow the hacker to intercept traffic unless they are on the same network and can manipulate routing (e.g., via ARP poisoning).

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

"A common man-in-the-middle (MITM) attack against wireless clients involves ARP poisoning. The hacker connects a device to the same wireless network as the client and sends fake ARP responses to the client, associating the hacker’s MAC address with the IP address of the default gateway. This causes the client to send traffic to the hacker’s device, allowing the hacker to intercept and manipulate the traffic." (Page 422, Wireless Threats Section)

Additionally, the HPE Aruba Networking Security Guide notes:

"ARP poisoning is a prevalent MITM attack in wireless networks. The attacker joins the same network as the client and responds to the client’s ARP requests with the attacker’s MAC address, redirecting traffic through the attacker’s device. This allows the attacker to intercept sensitive data or modify traffic between the client and the legitimate destination." (Page 72, Wireless MITM Attacks Section)

The main distinction between a Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS) attack and a traditional Denial of Service (DoS) attack is that a DDoS attack is launched from multiple devices, whereas a DoS attack originates from a single device. This distinction is critical because the distributed nature of a DDoS attack makes it more difficult to mitigate. Multiple attacking sources can generate a higher volume of malicious traffic, overwhelming the target more effectively than a single source, as seen in a DoS attack. DDoS attacks exploit a variety of devices across the internet, often coordinated using botnets, to flood targets with excessive requests, leading to service degradation or complete service denial.

HPE Aruba Networking ClearPass Policy Manager (CPPM) uses device profiling to classify endpoints, and one of its profiling methods involves analyzing HTTP User-Agent strings to identify device types (e.g., iPhone, Windows laptop). HTTP User-Agent strings are sent in HTTP headers when a client accesses a website. For CPPM to profile devices using HTTP User-Agent strings, it must receive the HTTP traffic from the clients. In this scenario, the company is using Mobility Controllers (MCs), campus APs, and AOS-CX switches, and CPPM is the only ClearPass solution in use.

HTTP User-Agent Profiling: CPPM can passively profile devices by analyzing HTTP traffic, but it needs to receive this traffic. In an AOS-8 architecture, the MC can mirror client traffic to CPPM for profiling. Since HTTP traffic is part of the data plane (user traffic), the MC must mirror the data plane traffic (not control plane traffic) to CPPM.

Option A, "Create datapath mirrors that use the CPPM's IP address as the destination," is correct. The MC can be configured to mirror client HTTP traffic to CPPM using a datapath mirror (also known as a GRE mirror). This involves setting up a mirror session on the MC that sends a copy of the client’s HTTP traffic to CPPM’s IP address. CPPM then analyzes the HTTP User-Agent strings in this traffic to profile the endpoints. For example, the command mirror session 1 destination ip source ip any protocol http can be used to mirror HTTP traffic to CPPM.

Option B, "Create an IF-MAP profile, which specifies credentials for an API admin account on CPPM," is incorrect. IF-MAP (Interface for Metadata Access Points) is a protocol used for sharing profiling data between ClearPass and other systems (e.g., Aruba Introspect), but it is not used for sending HTTP traffic to CPPM for profiling. Additionally, IF-MAP is not relevant when only CPPM is in use.

Option C, "Create control path mirrors to mirror HTTP traffic from clients to CPPM," is incorrect. Control path (control plane) traffic includes management traffic between the MC and APs (e.g., AP registration, heartbeats), not client HTTP traffic. HTTP traffic is part of the data plane, so a datapath mirror is required, not a control path mirror.

Option D, "Create a firewall whitelist rule that permits HTTP and CPPM's IP address," is incorrect. A firewall whitelist rule on the MC might be needed to allow traffic to CPPM, but this is not the primary step for enabling HTTP User-Agent profiling. The key requirement is to mirror the HTTP traffic to CPPM, which is done via a datapath mirror, not a firewall rule.

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

"To enable ClearPass Policy Manager (CPPM) to profile devices using HTTP User-Agent strings, the Mobility Controller (MC) must mirror client HTTP traffic to CPPM. This is done by creating a datapath mirror session that sends a copy of the client’s HTTP traffic to CPPM’s IP address. For example, use the command mirror session 1 destination ip source ip any protocol http to mirror HTTP traffic to CPPM. CPPM then analyzes the HTTP User-Agent strings to classify endpoints by type (e.g., iPhone, Windows laptop)." (Page 350, Device Profiling with CPPM Section)

Additionally, the HPE Aruba Networking ClearPass Policy Manager 6.11 User Guide notes:

"HTTP User-Agent profiling requires ClearPass to receive HTTP traffic from clients. In an Aruba Mobility Controller environment, configure a datapath mirror to send HTTP traffic to ClearPass’s IP address. ClearPass will parse the HTTP User-Agent strings to identify device types and operating systems, enabling accurate profiling." (Page 249, HTTP User-Agent Profiling Section)

In an Aruba network, when setting up a WPA3-Enterprise network that also supports WPA2-Enterprise clients, you would typically configure the network to operate in a transitional mode that supports both protocols. CNSA (Commercial National Security Algorithm) mode is intended for networks that require higher security standards as specified by the US National Security Agency (NSA). However, for compatibility with WPA2 clients, which do not support CNSA requirements, you would disable CNSA mode. WPA3 can use 256-bit encryption keys, which offer a higher level of security than the 128-bit keys used in WPA2.

In the context of digital forensics, policy A is the most relevant. It defines which data should be logged, where logs should be forwarded for analysis or storage, and which logs should be archived for future forensic analysis or audit purposes. This ensures that evidence is preserved in a way that supports forensic activities.

Social engineering is a type of attack that relies on manipulating individuals into performing actions or divulging confidential information, often by exploiting human psychology rather than technical vulnerabilities. HPE Aruba Networking’s security documentation, particularly in the context of Wireless Intrusion Prevention (WIP) and network security training, emphasizes the importance of recognizing social engineering as a common attack vector.

Option A, "An email is used to impersonate a bank and trick users into entering their bank login information on a fake website page," is a classic example of social engineering. This describes a phishing attack, where the attacker impersonates a trusted entity (a bank) to deceive users into providing sensitive information (login credentials) on a fraudulent website. Phishing is a well-documented form of social engineering that exploits trust and urgency to manipulate users.

Option B, "An attack exploits an operating system vulnerability and locks out users until they pay the ransom," describes a ransomware attack. This is a technical exploit that targets system vulnerabilities, not a social engineering attack, as it does not involve manipulating human behavior.

Option C, "A hacker eavesdrops on insecure communications, such as Remote Desktop Protocol (RDP), and discovers login credentials," describes a man-in-the-middle (MITM) or eavesdropping attack. This is a technical attack that exploits insecure communication protocols, not social engineering.

Option D, "A user visits a website and downloads a file that contains a worm, which self-replicates throughout the network," describes a malware infection (specifically a worm). While the user’s action of downloading the file might involve some level of deception, this is not primarily a social engineering attack; it’s a malware delivery mechanism that relies on the user’s action but not necessarily on psychological manipulation.

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

"Social engineering attacks manipulate individuals into performing actions or divulging confidential information. A common example is phishing, where attackers send fraudulent emails that appear to come from a trusted source, such as a bank, to trick users into providing sensitive information like login credentials or financial details on a fake website." (Page 421, Security Threats Section)

Additionally, the HPE Aruba Networking Security Fundamentals Guide notes:

"Phishing is a form of social engineering that uses deceptive emails, text messages, or other communications to trick users into revealing sensitive information or performing actions, such as clicking on malicious links or entering credentials on fraudulent websites." (Page 15, Social Engineering Section)

The scenario involves AOS-CX switches tunneling client traffic to an HPE Aruba Networking Mobility Controller (MC) in an AOS-8 architecture. The MC will apply firewall policies and perform deep packet inspection (DPI) on the tunneled traffic. The MC is dedicated to receiving traffic from the AOS-CX switches, and there are 114 employees (implying 114 potential clients). The question asks about the licensing requirements for the MC.

Tunneling from AOS-CX Switches to MC: In this setup, the AOS-CX switches act as Layer 2 devices, tunneling client traffic to the MC using a mechanism like GRE or VXLAN (though GRE is more common in AOS-8). The MC treats the tunneled traffic as if it were coming from wireless clients, applying firewall policies and DPI.

Licensing in AOS-8:

AP License (Access Point License): Required for each AP managed by the MC. Since the scenario involves AOS-CX switches tunneling traffic, not APs, AP licenses are not required.

PEF License (Policy Enforcement Firewall License): Required to enable the stateful firewall and DPI features on the MC. The PEF license is based on the number of devices (e.g., switches, APs) or users that the MC processes traffic for. In this case, the MC is processing traffic from AOS-CX switches, and the license is typically per switch (not per user or employee).

WCC License (Web Content Classification License): An optional license that enhances DPI by enabling URL-based filtering and web content classification. This is not mentioned as a requirement in the scenario.

Option A, "One PEF license per switch," is correct. Since the MC is dedicated to receiving traffic from the AOS-CX switches, and the MC will apply firewall policies and DPI, a PEF license is required. In AOS-8, when switches tunnel traffic to an MC, the PEF license is typically required per switch (not per user). With 114 employees, the number of switches is not specified, but the licensing model is per switch, so one PEF license per switch is needed.

Option B, "One PEF license per switch, and one WCC license per switch," is incorrect. While a PEF license is required, a WCC license is not mentioned as a requirement. WCC is for advanced web filtering, which is not specified in the scenario.

Option C, "One AP license per switch," is incorrect. AP licenses are for managing APs, not switches. Since the scenario involves switches tunneling traffic, not APs, AP licenses are not required.

Option D, "One AP license per switch, and one PEF license per switch," is incorrect for the same reason as Option C. AP licenses are not needed, but the PEF license per switch is correct.

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

"The Policy Enforcement Firewall (PEF) license is required on the Mobility Controller to enable stateful firewall policies and deep packet inspection (DPI). When AOS-CX switches tunnel client traffic to the MC for firewall processing, a PEF license is required for each switch. The license is based on the number of devices (e.g., switches) sending traffic to the MC, not the number of users. For example, if 10 switches tunnel traffic to the MC, 10 PEF licenses are required." (Page 375, Licensing Requirements Section)

Additionally, the HPE Aruba Networking Licensing Guide notes:

"PEF licenses on the Mobility Controller are required for firewall and DPI features. In deployments where switches tunnel traffic to the MC, the PEF license is typically per switch. AP licenses are not required unless the MC is managing APs. The Web Content Classification (WCC) license is optional and only needed for advanced URL filtering, which is not required for basic DPI." (Page 15, PEF Licensing Section)