FCP_FAZ_AN-7.4 Sample Questions Answers

In FortiOS and FortiAnalyzer, incident notifications can be sent to multiple external platforms, not limited to a single method such as email. Fortinet's security fabric and integration capabilities allow notifications to be sent through various fabric connectors and third-party integrations. This flexibility is designed to ensure that incident updates reach relevant personnel or systems using preferred communication channels, such as email, Syslog, SNMP, or integration with SIEM platforms.

Let’s review each answer option for clarity:

Option A: You can send notifications to multiple external platforms

This is correct. Fortinet’s notification system is capable of sending updates to multiple platforms, thanks to its support for fabric connectors and external integrations. This includes options such as email, Syslog, SNMP, and others based on configured connectors.

Option B: Notifications can be sent only by email

This is incorrect. Although email is a common method, FortiOS and FortiAnalyzer support multiple notification methods through various connectors, allowing notifications to be directed to different platforms as per the organization’s setup.

Option C: If you use multiple fabric connectors, all connectors must have the same settings

This is incorrect. Each fabric connector can have its unique configuration, allowing different connectors to be tailored for specific notification and integration requirements.

Option D: Notifications can be sent only when an incident is updated or deleted

This is incorrect. Notifications can be sent upon the creation of incidents, as well as upon updates or deletion, depending on the configuration.

References: According to FortiOS and FortiAnalyzer 7.4.1 documentation, notifications for incidents can be configured across various platforms by using multiple connectors, and they are not limited to email alone. This capability is part of the Fortinet Security Fabric, allowing for a broad range of integrations with external systems and platforms for effective incident response​.

When using FortiAnalyzer to create playbooks that interact with FortiOS devices, an Incoming Webhook trigger is required on the FortiGate side to make the actions in an automation stitch accessible through the FortiOS connector. The incoming webhook trigger allows FortiAnalyzer to initiate actions on FortiGate by sending HTTP POST requests to specified endpoints, which in turn trigger automation stitches defined on the FortiGate.

Here’s an analysis of each option:

Option A: FortiAnalyzer Event Handler

This is incorrect. The FortiAnalyzer Event Handler is used within FortiAnalyzer itself for handling log events and alerts, but it does not trigger automation stitches on FortiGate.

Option B: Fabric Connector event

This is incorrect. Fabric Connector events are related to Fortinet's Security Fabric integrations but are not specifically used to trigger FortiGate automation stitches from FortiAnalyzer.

Option C: FortiOS Event Log

This is incorrect. While FortiOS event logs can be used for monitoring, they are not designed to trigger automation stitches directly from FortiAnalyzer.

Option D: Incoming webhook

This is correct. The Incoming Webhook trigger on FortiGate enables it to receive requests from FortiAnalyzer, allowing playbooks to activate automation stitches defined on the FortiGate device. This method is commonly used to integrate actions from FortiAnalyzer to FortiGate via the FortiOS connector.

References: According to FortiOS and FortiAnalyzer documentation, when integrating FortiAnalyzer playbooks with FortiGate automation stitches, the recommended trigger type on FortiGate is an Incoming Webhook, allowing FortiAnalyzer to interact with FortiGate’s automation framework through the FortiOS connector​.

In FortiOS 7.4.1 and FortiAnalyzer 7.4.1, the "Unhandled" status in logs typically signifies that the FortiGate encountered a security event but did not take any specific action to block or alter it. This usually occurs in the context of Intrusion Prevention System (IPS) logs.

IPS logs with action=pass: When the IPS engine inspects traffic and determines that it does not match any known attack signatures or violate any configured policies, it assigns the action "pass". Since no action is taken to block or modify this traffic, the status is logged as "Unhandled."

Let's look at why the other options are incorrect:

An AV log with action=quarantine: Antivirus (AV) logs with the action "quarantine" indicate that a file was detected as malicious and moved to quarantine. This is a definitive action, so the status wouldn't be "Unhandled."

A WebFilter log will action=dropped: WebFilter logs with the action "dropped" indicate that web traffic was blocked according to the configured web filtering policies. Again, this is a specific action taken, not an "Unhandled" event.

An AppControl log with action=blocked: Application Control logs with the action "blocked" mean that an application was denied access based on the defined application control rules. This is also a clear action, not "Unhandled."

The exhibit shows a graph that tracks two metrics over time: Receive Rate and Insert Rate. These two rates are crucial for understanding the log processing behavior in FortiAnalyzer.

Understanding Receive Rate and Insert Rate:

Receive Rate: This is the rate at which FortiAnalyzer is receiving logs from connected devices.

Insert Rate: This is the rate at which FortiAnalyzer is indexing (inserting) logs into its database for storage and analysis.

Data Point at 21:20:

At 21:20, the Insert Rate line is above the Receive Rate line, indicating that FortiAnalyzer is inserting logs into its database at a faster rate than it is receiving them. This situation suggests that FortiAnalyzer is able to keep up with the incoming logs and is possibly processing a backlog or temporarily received logs faster than new logs are coming in.

Option Analysis:

Option A - FortiAnalyzer is Indexing Logs Faster Than Logs are Being Received: This accurately describes the scenario at 21:20, where the Insert Rate exceeds the Receive Rate. This indicates that FortiAnalyzer is handling logs efficiently at that moment, with no backlog in processing.

Option B - The fortilogd Daemon is Ahead in Indexing by One Log: The data does not provide specific information about the fortilogd daemon’s log count, only the rates. This option is incorrect.

Option C - SQL Database Requires a Rebuild: High receive lag would imply a backlog in receiving and indexing logs, typically visible if the Receive Rate were significantly above the Insert Rate, which is not the case here.

Option D - FortiAnalyzer is Temporarily Buffering Logs to Index Older Logs First: There is no indication of buffering in this scenario. Buffering would usually occur if the Receive Rate were higher than the Insert Rate, indicating that FortiAnalyzer is storing logs temporarily due to indexing lag.

Conclusion:

Correct Answer: A. FortiAnalyzer is indexing logs faster than logs are being received.

The graph at 21:20 shows a higher Insert Rate than Receive Rate, indicating efficient log processing by FortiAnalyzer.

References:

FortiAnalyzer 7.4.1 documentation on log processing metrics, Receive Rate, and Insert Rate indicators.

When a new playbook is created on FortiAnalyzer, the system requires some time to parse and validate the playbook before it can be executed. Parsing involves checking the playbook's structure, ensuring that all syntax and logic are correct, and preparing the playbook for execution within FortiAnalyzer’s automation engine. This initial parsing step is necessary for FortiAnalyzer to load the playbook into its operational environment correctly.

Here’s why the other options are incorrect:

Option A: FortiAnalyzer needs that time to parse the new playbook

This is correct. The delay is due to the parsing and setup process required to prepare the new playbook for execution. FortiAnalyzer’s automation engine checks for any issues or dependencies within the playbook, ensuring that it can run without errors.

Option B: FortiAnalyzer needs that time to debug the new playbook

This is incorrect. Debugging is not an automatic process that FortiAnalyzer undertakes after playbook creation. Debugging, if necessary, is a manual task performed by the administrator if there are issues with the playbook execution.

Option C: FortiAnalyzer needs that time to back up the current playbooks

This is incorrect. FortiAnalyzer does not automatically back up playbooks every time a new one is created. Backups of configuration and playbooks are typically scheduled as part of routine maintenance and are not triggered by playbook creation.

Option D: FortiAnalyzer needs that time to ensure there are no other playbooks running

This is incorrect. FortiAnalyzer can manage multiple playbooks running simultaneously, so it does not require waiting for other playbooks to finish before initiating a new one. The waiting time specifically relates to the parsing process of the newly created playbook.

References: FortiAnalyzer documentation states that after creating a playbook, a brief delay is expected as the system parses and validates the playbook. This ensures that any syntax errors or logical inconsistencies are resolved before the playbook is executed, making option A the correct answer​.

When a generated report does not include the expected information despite the logs being present, there are several factors to check to ensure accurate data representation in the report.

Option A - Check the Time Frame Covered by the Report:

Reports are generated based on a specified time frame. If the time frame does not encompass the period when the relevant logs were collected, those logs will not appear in the report. Ensuring the time frame is correctly set to cover the intended logs is crucial for accurate report content.

Conclusion: Correct.

Option B - Disable Auto-Cache:

Auto-cache is a feature in FortiAnalyzer that helps optimize report generation by using cached data for frequently used datasets. Disabling auto-cache is generally not necessary unless there is an issue with outdated data being used. In most cases, it does not directly impact whether certain logs are included in a report.

Conclusion: Incorrect.

Option C - Increase the Report Utilization Quota:

The report utilization quota controls the resource limits for generating reports. While insufficient quota might prevent a report from generating or completing, it does not typically cause specific log entries to be missing. Therefore, this option is not directly relevant to missing data within the report.

Conclusion: Incorrect.

Option D - Test the Dataset:

Datasets in FortiAnalyzer define which logs and fields are pulled into the report. If a dataset is misconfigured, it could exclude certain logs. Testing the dataset helps verify that the correct data is being pulled and that all required logs are included in the report parameters.

Conclusion: Correct.

Conclusion:

Correct Answer: A. Check the time frame covered by the report and D. Test the dataset.

These actions directly address the issues that could cause missing information in a report when logs are available but not displayed.

References:

FortiAnalyzer 7.4.1 documentation on report generation settings, time frames, and dataset configuration.