Pass Your Cisco 350-401 Exam Easy!

Policy was tied only to IP/VLAN placement rather than the intended TrustSec identity tags. Port/protocol-only filtering cannot recognize application-layer signatures or allowed decryption context.

The transit path does not carry or reconstruct security group tags to the enforcement point. Port/protocol-only filtering cannot recognize application-layer signatures or allowed decryption context.

No internal segmentation or layered threat controls protect east-west movement. Port/protocol-only filtering cannot recognize application-layer signatures or allowed decryption context.

This test measures a different behavior: Test a simulated malicious flow through ingress inspection and segmentation controls. It does not establish the target outcome. For the documented fault, the direct acceptance test is: test a known allowed business app and a blocked malicious signature in the approved inspection scope.

This test measures a different behavior: Inspect tag values at ingress and enforcement devices for a controlled endpoint flow. It does not establish the target outcome. For the documented fault, the direct acceptance test is: test a known allowed business app and a blocked malicious signature in the approved inspection scope.

This test measures a different behavior: Test the intended source/destination SGT pair across VLAN changes and check policy counters. It does not establish the target outcome. For the documented fault, the direct acceptance test is: test a known allowed business app and a blocked malicious signature in the approved inspection scope.

That diagnosis is supported by a different symptom: A compromised workstation reaches sensitive management hosts after bypassing the one permissive edge filter. Here the recorded observation is: a basic destination-port ACL permits both harmless and malicious traffic on TCP443. The applicable cause is: port/protocol-only filtering cannot recognize application-layer signatures or allowed decryption context.

That diagnosis is supported by a different symptom: A user moved to a new VLAN bypasses the old subnet-based segmentation policy. Here the recorded observation is: a basic destination-port ACL permits both harmless and malicious traffic on TCP443. The applicable cause is: port/protocol-only filtering cannot recognize application-layer signatures or allowed decryption context.

That diagnosis is supported by a different symptom: The destination SGACL treats all traffic as unknown SGT despite correct access-edge classification. Here the recorded observation is: a basic destination-port ACL permits both harmless and malicious traffic on TCP443. The applicable cause is: port/protocol-only filtering cannot recognize application-layer signatures or allowed decryption context.

That control reduces a separate risk: No internal segmentation or layered threat controls protect east-west movement. For the described design, the recurring risk arises from: port/protocol-only filtering cannot recognize application-layer signatures or allowed decryption context. The specific required safeguard is: maintain threat signatures, certificate/inspection policy and application allowlists.

That control reduces a separate risk: Policy was tied only to IP/VLAN placement rather than the intended TrustSec identity tags. For the described design, the recurring risk arises from: port/protocol-only filtering cannot recognize application-layer signatures or allowed decryption context. The specific required safeguard is: maintain threat signatures, certificate/inspection policy and application allowlists.

That control reduces a separate risk: The transit path does not carry or reconstruct security group tags to the enforcement point. For the described design, the recurring risk arises from: port/protocol-only filtering cannot recognize application-layer signatures or allowed decryption context. The specific required safeguard is: maintain threat signatures, certificate/inspection policy and application allowlists.

Policy was tied only to IP/VLAN placement rather than the intended TrustSec identity tags. The Ethernet hop lacks functioning MACsec encryption despite ordinary VLAN segmentation.

No internal segmentation or layered threat controls protect east-west movement. The Ethernet hop lacks functioning MACsec encryption despite ordinary VLAN segmentation.

The transit path does not carry or reconstruct security group tags to the enforcement point. The Ethernet hop lacks functioning MACsec encryption despite ordinary VLAN segmentation.

This test measures a different behavior: Inspect tag values at ingress and enforcement devices for a controlled endpoint flow. It does not establish the target outcome. For the documented fault, the direct acceptance test is: capture frames on the physical link and confirm encrypted MACsec data with authorized peers maintaining connectivity.

This test measures a different behavior: Test the intended source/destination SGT pair across VLAN changes and check policy counters. It does not establish the target outcome. For the documented fault, the direct acceptance test is: capture frames on the physical link and confirm encrypted MACsec data with authorized peers maintaining connectivity.

This test measures a different behavior: Test a simulated malicious flow through ingress inspection and segmentation controls. It does not establish the target outcome. For the documented fault, the direct acceptance test is: capture frames on the physical link and confirm encrypted MACsec data with authorized peers maintaining connectivity.

That diagnosis is supported by a different symptom: The destination SGACL treats all traffic as unknown SGT despite correct access-edge classification. Here the recorded observation is: a passive tap reads sensitive unencrypted payloads on the supposedly protected switch-to-switch wire. The applicable cause is: the Ethernet hop lacks functioning MACsec encryption despite ordinary VLAN segmentation.

That diagnosis is supported by a different symptom: A user moved to a new VLAN bypasses the old subnet-based segmentation policy. Here the recorded observation is: a passive tap reads sensitive unencrypted payloads on the supposedly protected switch-to-switch wire. The applicable cause is: the Ethernet hop lacks functioning MACsec encryption despite ordinary VLAN segmentation.

That diagnosis is supported by a different symptom: A compromised workstation reaches sensitive management hosts after bypassing the one permissive edge filter. Here the recorded observation is: a passive tap reads sensitive unencrypted payloads on the supposedly protected switch-to-switch wire. The applicable cause is: the Ethernet hop lacks functioning MACsec encryption despite ordinary VLAN segmentation.

Segmentation and threat inspection do not encrypt Ethernet frames against someone capturing the physical cable.

That control reduces a separate risk: Policy was tied only to IP/VLAN placement rather than the intended TrustSec identity tags. For the described design, the recurring risk arises from: the Ethernet hop lacks functioning MACsec encryption despite ordinary VLAN segmentation. The specific required safeguard is: manage MACsec keys/certificates and link compatibility during interface or optics changes.

Security group tag propagation carries group identity, not the link-layer encryption needed against passive packet capture.

Enabling the supported SGT propagation or mapping mechanism across the relevant transit path would not meet the need for network access rules.

Using a suitable next-generation firewall with application awareness and permitted TLS inspection controls would not meet the need for network access rules.

Using supported IEEE 802.1AE MACsec link encryption and compatible key agreement on both switch endpoints would not meet the need for network access rules.

This test measures a different behavior: Capture frames on the physical link and confirm encrypted MACsec data with authorized peers maintaining connectivity. It does not establish the target outcome. For the documented fault, the direct acceptance test is: test the intended source/destination SGT pair across VLAN changes and check policy counters.

This test measures a different behavior: Test a known allowed business app and a blocked malicious signature in the approved inspection scope. It does not establish the target outcome. For the documented fault, the direct acceptance test is: test the intended source/destination SGT pair across VLAN changes and check policy counters.

This test measures a different behavior: Inspect tag values at ingress and enforcement devices for a controlled endpoint flow. It does not establish the target outcome. For the documented fault, the direct acceptance test is: test the intended source/destination SGT pair across VLAN changes and check policy counters.

That diagnosis is supported by a different symptom: A basic destination-port ACL permits both harmless and malicious traffic on TCP443. Here the recorded observation is: a user moved to a new VLAN bypasses the old subnet-based segmentation policy. The applicable cause is: policy was tied only to IP/VLAN placement rather than the intended TrustSec identity tags.

That diagnosis is supported by a different symptom: The destination SGACL treats all traffic as unknown SGT despite correct access-edge classification. Here the recorded observation is: a user moved to a new VLAN bypasses the old subnet-based segmentation policy. The applicable cause is: policy was tied only to IP/VLAN placement rather than the intended TrustSec identity tags.

That diagnosis is supported by a different symptom: A passive tap reads sensitive unencrypted payloads on the supposedly protected switch-to-switch wire. Here the recorded observation is: a user moved to a new VLAN bypasses the old subnet-based segmentation policy. The applicable cause is: policy was tied only to IP/VLAN placement rather than the intended TrustSec identity tags.