Free Fortinet NSE4_FGT_AD-7.6 Practice Exam with Questions & Answers

From the exhibits:

The firewall policy has NAT enabled and is configured to Use Dynamic IP Pool.

The selected IP pool (Internet-pool) is configured as:

Type: One-to-One

External IP Range: 100.65.0.110–100.65.0.111 (only two public IPs)

PC1 and PC2 can access the internet because each one-to-one NAT mapping consumes one public IP from the pool. When PC3 is added, there is no third public IP available in the pool, so FortiGate cannot allocate a one-to-one mapping for PC3 and the session fails.

FortiOS behavior here is standard: with one-to-one IP pools, the available pool size limits how many distinct internal sources can be translated concurrently (depending on allocation and sessions), and a pool with only two IPs will not reliably support three separate hosts needing translations.

Therefore, the administrator can fix this in two valid ways:

B. In the IP pool configuration, set end ip to 100.65.0.112.

This expands the pool by adding an additional public IP address, making three public IPs available (.110, .111, .112), so PC3 can be assigned an address for one-to-one NAT.

D. In the IP pool configuration, set type to overload.

Changing the pool type to overload enables PAT (many-to-one), allowing multiple internal hosts (PC1, PC2, PC3) to share the pool address(es) using different source ports. This removes the “one public IP per internal host” limitation inherent to one-to-one pools.

Why the other options are not correct:

A. Multiple Interface Policies is unrelated to IP pool exhaustion and does not solve NAT allocation limits.

C. match-vip affects VIP matching behavior for destination NAT/virtual IP usage and does not address the source NAT pool shortage causing PC3 to fail.

When the Application sensor receives traffic on that port, the protocol decoder will try to determine if the received data matches the HTTPS traffic In this case it will not match because it is P2P traffic, so this will class as violation and blocked The protocol decoder also try to determine what type of traffic it is, and even if it could not figure out it is P2P traffic, it still count as a violation because even though it does not know what it is, it knows for fact it is not HTTPS

Based on the diagnose debug rating output provided in the exhibit and the standard behavior of the FortiGuard connection mechanism in FortiOS 7.6:

Weight Calculation (Statement A is True):

In FortiOS, the rating server selection process uses a weight-based system.

According to official documentation, the weight increases with failed packets (lost responses) and decreases with successful packets.

This mechanism ensures that servers with poor reliability are penalized by having higher weights, effectively pushing them to the bottom of the preference list.

Default Port Communication (Statement D is True):

The exhibit explicitly shows the communication is using HTTPS on port 8888.

In FortiOS 7.6 (and legacy versions like 6.2/6.4), FortiGuard filtering supports specific protocols and ports: HTTPS on ports 443, 53, and 8888, where 8888 is considered a default port for FortiGuard queries.

Ports 53 and 8888 are standard for both UDP and TCP/HTTPS FortiGuard communications to avoid common firewall blocks on standard web ports.

Why other options are incorrect:

Statement B (Unreliable protocols): While you can configure UDP (which is unreliable), the exhibit specifically shows HTTPS is being used, which is a reliable (TCP-based) protocol.

Statement C (DNS lookup): In the "Flags" column of the server list, a server found via DNS lookup would be marked with the "D" flag. The exhibit shows the flag as "I" (indicating the last INIT request was sent to this server) and a numeric "2," but the "D" flag is absent. Additionally, the IP 10.0.1.241 is a private address, suggesting it is a manually configured FortiManager or local override server rather than a public server found via global DNS lookup.

In FortiSASE Secure Internet Access (SIA) agent-based mode, traffic steering and security enforcement rely on components integrated with the FortiClient agent.

Components used in SIA agent-based mode

A. FortiSASE Firewall-as-a-Service (FWaaS)

Correct.

FWaaS is a core security component of FortiSASE.

It enforces firewall policies, security inspection, and access control for agent-based users.

All user traffic tunneled by the agent is inspected by FWaaS.

C. VPN policies

Correct.

In agent-based mode, the FortiClient establishes a secure tunnel to FortiSASE.

VPN policies define:

Authentication

Access control

Traffic steering

These policies are fundamental to agent-based connectivity.

Why the other options are incorrect

B. Proxy auto-configuration (PAC) filePAC files are used in agentless or proxy-based modes, not agent-based SIA.

D. FortiExtenderFortiExtender is a WAN extension device and is unrelated to FortiSASE SIA agent-based architecture.

NetAPI: Polls temporary sessions created on the DC when a user logs on or logs off and calls the NetSessionEnum function on Windows. It’s faster than the WinSec and WMI methods; however, it can miss some logon events if a DC is under heavy system load. This is because sessions can be quickly created and purged form RAM, before the agent has a chance to poll and notify FG.

With full SSL inspection, FortiGate performs a man-in-the-middle process: it decrypts the HTTPS session, inspects it, then re-encrypts it. To do this, FortiGate presents a substitute certificate to the client, signed by the CA certificate configured in the SSL/SSH inspection profile (for example, Fortinet_CA_SSL or a custom enterprise CA).

Browsers will show certificate warning errors when the issuing CA is not trusted by the client device/browser trust store. This only happens for HTTPS because certificates are used in TLS; HTTP has no certificate exchange, so no warning appears.

Why the other options are incorrect:

A: Allowing invalid server certificates affects whether FortiGate blocks/permits connections to sites with bad certs; it does not fix the client warning about FortiGate’s substituted cert.

B: Proxy vs flow inspection mode does not inherently cause certificate warnings; the warning is about trust of the signing CA.

D: Missing extensions is not the typical reason across “any HTTPS website”; the standard reason is the client does not trust the FortiGate inspection CA

In FortiOS 7.6, the Antivirus scan master switch in an antivirus profile becomes available only after at least one supported protocol is enabled for inspection.

What the exhibit shows

A new antivirus profile named FTP_AV_Profile

Feature set: Flow-based

Antivirus scan switch is grayed out

All Inspected Protocols (HTTP, SMTP, POP3, IMAP, FTP, CIFS) are currently disabled

Why the Antivirus scan switch is grayed out

In FortiOS antivirus profiles:

The Antivirus scan toggle is a dependent control

It cannot be enabled unless at least one inspected protocol is selected

This prevents enabling AV scanning when there is no traffic type to scan

This behavior is documented in the FortiOS 7.6 Antivirus Profile configuration section.

Once you enable a protocol (for example, FTP), the Antivirus scan switch becomes active and configurable.

Why option B is correct

B. None of the inspected protocols are active in this profile.

All protocol toggles are OFF

Therefore, FortiGate disables (grays out) the Antivirus scan option

This is expected and correct behavior

Why the other options are incorrect

A. Antivirus scan is disabled under Feature visibilityIncorrect. Feature Visibility controls whether Antivirus appears in the GUI, not whether the scan switch is enabled inside a profile.

C. Feature set must be Proxy-basedIncorrect. Antivirus scanning is supported in both flow-based and proxy-based modes.

D. Less than 2 GB RAM does not support Antivirus scanIncorrect. Memory size affects performance and offloading, not basic AV scan availability.