Pass the Juniper JNCIS-SEC JN0-336 Questions and answers with CertsForce

The correct answers are C and D. Once the SSL proxy profile already exists, the SRX still needs a security policy that matches the SSL/TLS traffic and applies the SSL proxy profile as an application service. Juniper’s SSL proxy configuration procedure explicitly shows creating the security policy match criteria and then applying the SSL proxy profile with then permit application-services ssl-proxy profile-name. It also states that SSL forward and reverse proxy require the profile to be configured at the firewall rule level.

Option D is correct because SSL proxy is not an end goal by itself; it decrypts SSL/TLS traffic so Layer 7 security services can inspect it. Juniper states that decrypted SSL traffic is available for security services and provides examples where the SSL proxy profile and a Content Security/UTM policy are both attached to the same security policy. Option A is wrong because host-inbound-traffic HTTPS controls HTTPS access to the SRX itself, not transit SSL proxy inspection. Option B is wrong because SSL proxy profiles are not referenced under a security zone for this function; they are applied under the matching security policy. Reference topics: SSL Proxy, SSL proxy profile, security policy application-services, Layer 7 inspection, UTM/IDP/ATP integration.

The correct answer is B. count. In Junos security policy configuration, count is the policy parameter used for accounting and tabular operational visibility. Juniper’s security policy configuration rules state that accounting and auditing elements can be specified with count and log, while logging itself is enabled at either session-init or session-close.

The operational result is visible through commands such as show security policies hit-count, which displays a table of policy hit counters, including fields such as index, from-zone, to-zone, policy name, policy count, and action. Juniper defines this command as displaying the number of times a security policy rule matches traffic, and the sample output is explicitly tabular. Option A, permit, is an action, not a counter or logging/accounting parameter. Option C, session-init, logs at the beginning of a session, and option D, session-close, logs at session teardown. Those two parameters generate logs, but they do not provide the tabular policy-count view being asked about. Reference topics: security policy accounting, count parameter, hit-count, operational-mode policy monitoring, session-init/session-close logging.

The correct answers are A and C. In SSL forward proxy, the SRX sits between internal clients and external SSL/TLS servers. Juniper’s SSL proxy configuration documentation shows that a forward proxy profile is created when root-ca is configured and server-certificate is not configured. This root CA is used by the SRX to generate substitute certificates for intercepted SSL sessions, so internal clients must trust the CA used by the firewall. Juniper’s procedure specifically includes generating or loading a local certificate and applying it as the root-ca in the SSL proxy profile.

Option C is also correct because forward proxy terminates the client-side SSL session and establishes a separate SSL session toward the destination server. Juniper states that the SSL proxy acts as an SSL server to the client and establishes a new SSL session to the server; from the server’s perspective, the SRX is the SSL client. Option B is wrong because forward proxy intercepts the server certificate and creates a substitute certificate; forwarding the actual server certificate unchanged is associated with reverse proxy behavior. Option D is wrong because Encrypted Traffic Insights is not the required forward-proxy mechanism here. Reference topics: SSL Proxy, SSL forward proxy, root CA, client protection, certificate interception.

The correct answers are A and B. In an SRX chassis cluster, the cluster ID identifies the chassis cluster itself, while the node ID identifies the individual SRX device inside that two-node cluster. Juniper states that a cluster is identified by a cluster-id value from 1 through 255, and that setting the cluster ID to 0 is equivalent to disabling clustering. Therefore, option A is correct and option C is wrong.

Option B is also correct because Juniper states that a cluster node is identified by a node ID specified as a number from 0 through 1. A normal SRX chassis cluster has two nodes: node0 and node1. The two devices must use the same nonzero cluster ID so they belong to the same cluster, but each device must use a different node ID so Junos can apply node-specific configuration, interface numbering, redundancy-group ownership, and management settings correctly. Option D is wrong because node IDs do not range from 1 through 255; that range applies to cluster IDs, not node IDs. Reference topics: HA Clustering, cluster ID, node ID, chassis cluster formation, node0/node1 identification.

The correct answers are B and C. To form an SRX chassis cluster, both devices must be assigned the same cluster ID and different node IDs. Juniper states that the cluster ID identifies the cluster, while the node ID identifies the individual node within that cluster. A valid two-node SRX chassis cluster uses node 0 on one chassis and node 1 on the other chassis. Juniper’s example shows the operational-mode commands as set chassis cluster cluster-id 1 node 0 reboot on the first device and set chassis cluster cluster-id 1 node 1 reboot on the second device.

Option A is wrong because cluster-id 0 disables clustering rather than forming a cluster. It also shows configuration-mode prompt #, while this chassis cluster node assignment is performed from operational mode. Option D is doubly wrong: cluster-id 0 disables clustering, and node 2 is invalid because SRX chassis cluster node IDs are limited to 0 and 1. The exam options omit the reboot keyword, but the only logically valid pair is still SRX1 as node 0 and SRX2 as node 1 under the same nonzero cluster ID. Reference topics: HA Clustering, chassis cluster ID, node ID, operational-mode cluster enablement.

The correct answer is C. Enable connectivity between the SRX Series device and Juniper ATP Cloud. Juniper ATP Cloud cannot inspect files, receive verdicts, or apply cloud-based malware intelligence until the SRX is enrolled and has a working secure connection to the ATP Cloud service. Juniper states that SRX enrollment establishes a secure connection between the SRX Series Firewall and the Juniper ATP Cloud server, downloads and installs certificate authorities, creates local certificates, enrolls them with the cloud server, and establishes the secure cloud connection.

Option A is not the first required configuration setting because the anti-malware service depends on successful cloud onboarding and connectivity. Option B is premature because firewall/security policies can reference malware inspection only after the device is properly connected and enrolled. Option D is also later in the workflow; anti-malware policies define how files are inspected and what action is taken, but those policies are useless if the SRX cannot communicate with ATP Cloud. Juniper also notes that ATP Cloud requires both the Routing Engine and Packet Forwarding Engine to reach the Internet, and DNS must resolve the cloud URL. Reference topics: ATP Cloud onboarding, SRX enrollment, advanced anti-malware connection, secure cloud connectivity, anti-malware policy deployment.

The correct answers are A, C, and E. During Security Director device discovery, Junos Space first finds and connects to the managed device, then synchronizes the device inventory and configuration into the Junos Space database. Juniper’s Security Director documentation states that discovery uses a discovery profile containing target information, authentication credentials, probes, and SSH fingerprints. During discovery, Junos Space connects to the physical device and retrieves the running configuration and status information. It also states that Junos Space uses SSH, with optional ping and SNMP, to discover network devices.

Option B is wrong because device discovery is not a reboot operation. Rebooting would be disruptive and is not part of onboarding a managed SRX into Security Director. Option D is wrong because discovery does not automatically inject a local superuser into the SRX configuration. Security Director authenticates using credentials supplied in the discovery profile; it does not create privileged local accounts as a discovery action. The tested workflow is management-plane discovery: connect, authenticate, retrieve inventory/status, and import configuration state. Reference topics: Security Director, device discovery, discovery profiles, SSH, running configuration import, device status synchronization.

The correct answer is B. The node with the highest priority will become a primary node. In an SRX chassis cluster, redundancy groups determine which node is primary and which node is secondary. Juniper states that when priorities are assigned to nodes in a redundancy group, the node with the higher configured priority is initially designated as the primary, while the other node becomes secondary. This is the direct mechanism an administrator uses to influence primary-node selection for a redundancy group.

Option A is wrong because the burnt-in address is not the administrative method used to designate the primary node. BIA can be part of deterministic hardware identity behavior, but primary election is controlled through redundancy-group priority, preemption behavior, and failover state. Option C is the opposite of Juniper behavior; the lower-priority node does not win the election. Option D is also wrong because a priority of one is still a valid low priority. The ineligible value is 0, and Juniper specifically warns about failover behavior involving nodes with priority 0 because such nodes are not ready to accept traffic.

Reference topics: HA Clustering, redundancy groups, node priority, primary/secondary election, preemption, chassis cluster failover.

The correct answer is A. It uses AppID services. Juniper SSL proxy does not rely only on TCP/443 or a static destination-port assumption. It uses Application Identification services to dynamically determine whether the session is SSL/TLS encrypted. Juniper states directly that SSL proxy uses application identification services to detect whether a session is SSL encrypted, and SSL proxy is allowed only when the session is identified as encrypted. If the application system cache marks the session as Encrypted=Yes, SSL proxy can transition into proxy processing; if the session is marked Encrypted=No, SSL proxy ignores it.

Option B is wrong because packet length does not reliably identify SSL/TLS encryption. Option C is a common trap: many SSL/TLS sessions use port 443, but SSL/TLS can run on nonstandard ports, and non-SSL applications can also use port 443. Junos uses AppID to avoid that weak assumption. Option D is wrong because a CA is used to sign or validate certificates during SSL forward or reverse proxy operations; it is not the mechanism used to detect whether a session is encrypted. Reference topics: SSL Proxy, AppID, encrypted session detection, application system cache, SSL/TLS inspection.

The correct answers are B and C. IDP false positives occur when legitimate traffic matches an attack signature or attack object incorrectly. One valid way to reduce false positives is to remove the problematic attack object from the IDP rule, especially when that object is not relevant to the protected application, server role, or traffic direction. Juniper defines attack objects as the items specified in IDP rules to identify malicious activity, so removing an irrelevant or noisy attack object directly reduces unwanted matches.

Option C is also correct because Juniper specifically recommends using an exempt rulebase when an IDP rule uses an attack object group containing attack objects that produce false positives or irrelevant log records. Exempt rules can exclude a specific source, destination, or source/destination pair from matching an IDP rule, preventing unnecessary alarms.

Option A is wrong because changing the action to a lower severity response does not reduce the false positive; it only changes what happens after the false match occurs. Option D is wrong because a terminal rule at the end of the rule base does not prevent earlier false-positive matches. Reference topics: IDP, attack objects, exempt rulebase, false-positive tuning, IDP rule matching.