Free Juniper JN0-336 Practice Exam with Questions & Answers | Set: 2

The correct answer is A. It supports a maximum of two domains. Juniper’s Active Directory identity-source configuration guidance states that an SRX Series Firewall using the integrated user firewall/Active Directory identity source can be configured for a maximum of two domains. That is the exact limit relevant to this question. The same Juniper configuration page separately states that a maximum of 10 domain controllers can be configured, which directly eliminates option C because the supported figure is not 20 Active Directory servers per domain.

Option B is wrong because Active Directory identity source is not presented as a logical-systems feature in the JNCIS-SEC identity-aware firewall context. Option D is wrong because the primary Active Directory mechanism reads Windows domain controller event logs and uses WMI/DCOM plus LDAP to build IP-to-user and group mappings. Juniper describes the SRX as reading and monitoring the Windows event log on the domain controller, then using LDAP to obtain user/group information. Non-domain or non-Windows cases typically require alternate authentication behavior such as captive portal, not native Active Directory event-log tracking.

Reference topics: Identity-Aware Security Policies, Active Directory identity source, integrated user firewall, domain limits, domain controllers, WMIC, LDAP mapping.

The correct answers are B and D. In VPN cryptography, hashing is used for authentication and integrity checking, not confidentiality. Juniper’s IPsec documentation describes MD5 as producing a 128-bit hash, also called a digital signature or message digest, from a message of arbitrary length. It also describes SHA as producing a 160-bit hash from a message of arbitrary length. That directly supports option B because a hash function takes variable-length input and produces a fixed-size digest.

Option D is also correct because Juniper states that the resulting hash is used like a fingerprint of the input to verify content and source authenticity and integrity. Juniper’s IPsec overview further explains that Junos compares the calculated message digest against the expected digest to verify that the message has not been tampered with.

Option A is wrong because hashing is not compression; it is one-way digest generation. Option C is wrong because encryption protects confidentiality, while hashing validates integrity and authenticity. In IPsec, algorithms such as AES, DES, and 3DES provide encryption, while MD5, SHA-1, and SHA-2 provide hashing/HMAC-based authentication. Reference topics: IPsec VPN, hashing, HMAC, MD5, SHA, message digest, data integrity.

The correct answers are A and D. Preparing Active Directory for JIMS requires creating limited-permission service accounts and assigning those accounts to the required Active Directory groups. Juniper’s JIMS deployment guidance states that you must create service accounts so JIMS can read from the defined directory services and identity producers; if PC probing is used, a service account is also required for that function. The same JIMS documentation includes a section named Configure Limited-Permission User Accounts, followed by Add Limited Permission User Accounts to Active Directory Groups.

Option A is correct because the JIMS preparation workflow commonly uses limited-permission accounts for event log access and PC probe access. Juniper identifies accounts such as JIMS-EventLogRemoteAccess and JIMS-PC-Probe in the Active Directory group-membership procedure. Option D is correct because those limited accounts must be added to the proper AD groups, including Event Log Readers and the groups required for remote management or PC probe operation.

Option B is wrong because the tested preparation requirement is not three limited-access accounts. Option C is wrong because JIMS should not be prepared by adding a broad full-access account; the course objective is least-privilege identity collection. Reference topics: JIMS, Active Directory preparation, limited-permission service accounts, Event Log Readers, PC probe account.

The correct answers are A and C. Juniper ATP Cloud uses a malware-analysis pipeline. When a file is submitted, the first step is a cache lookup based on the file hash. Juniper explains that if the file has already been analyzed, the stored verdict is returned to the SRX Series Firewall and there is no need to re-analyze the file. That directly supports C and eliminates B, because analysis does not continue when a cached verdict is found.

If the cache lookup does not return a verdict, the remaining ATP Cloud analysis techniques are used. Juniper describes the pipeline model in which each analysis technique creates a verdict number, and those verdicts are combined into a final verdict score from 0 to 10. That final threat score is what the SRX compares against ATP Cloud policy settings to permit or block the session.

Option D is wrong because ATP Cloud does not simply return the first score generated by any one feature. The expected behavior is cumulative/final scoring across the remaining analysis pipeline. Reference topics: Juniper ATP Cloud, malware analysis pipeline, cache lookup, verdict number, threat score, SRX enforcement.

The correct answers are C and D. The cSRX is Juniper’s containerized SRX firewall, intended for lightweight virtual and container environments where rapid deployment and high density matter. Juniper’s cSRX documentation lists supported security capabilities including basic firewall policy, NAT, Intrusion Detection and Prevention, content security/UTM functions, ATP Cloud, SSL Proxy, AppID, AppFW, and AppTrack. That supports option C, because cSRX provides SRX security services in a containerized footprint rather than requiring a full VM-based firewall appliance.

Option D is also correct because Juniper identifies the cSRX’s small footprint and minimum resource reservation requirements as key benefits; it is designed to scale more densely than VM-based firewall options. Juniper’s Day One cSRX guide specifically identifies faster deployment, a small footprint, and reduced resource consumption as major benefits. Option A is not the best answer for this exam item because the question asks for cSRX deployment benefits, not merely forwarding-mode support. Option B is wrong because the tested cSRX advantage is not a default three-zone configuration. Reference topics: cSRX container firewall, virtual SRX deployment, firewall/NAT/IPS/UTM services, lightweight resource footprint.

The correct answer is B. ip-notify. When administrators want visibility without enforcement impact, ip-notify is the correct IP action. Juniper Security Director documentation defines IP Notify as an IP action that does not take any action against future traffic but logs the event. That is exactly the requirement in the question: traffic matching the IDP condition must not be blocked, closed, or rate-limited until administrators have reviewed the events and decided whether enforcement is appropriate.

Option A, ip-block, is wrong because it blocks future packets matching the IP action rule. That would immediately impact traffic. Option C, ip-connection-rate-limit, is wrong because it limits the connection rate and therefore changes traffic behavior before administrators complete evaluation. Option D, ip-close, is also wrong because it closes matching future sessions by sending reset packets to the client and server, which is disruptive. In a safe evaluation or tuning phase, the proper approach is to log and observe first, then move to stronger actions such as block, close, or rate-limit only after the detected condition has been validated. Reference topics: IDP IP actions, ip-notify, event logging, non-disruptive evaluation mode, IDP policy tuning.

The correct answers are A, B, and D. In Security Director, the Shared Objects workspace is used for reusable objects that can be referenced by policies across managed devices. Juniper documentation shows that address objects are created from Configure > Shared Objects > Addresses, and those address objects can be used across devices in firewall, NAT, IPS, and VPN services. This supports option B, because IP address/address objects are classic shared objects.

Option A is correct because Geo IP policies are created from Configure > Shared Objects > Geo IP. Juniper’s procedure explicitly places Geo IP under the Shared Objects path. Option D is also correct because policy enforcement groups are created from Configure > Shared Objects > Policy Enforcement Groups and are used to group endpoints such as IP addresses, subnets, or locations for policy-enforcement workflows.

Option C is wrong because audit logs are monitoring records, not reusable shared objects; Juniper places them under Monitor > Audit Logs, where they track login history and user-initiated tasks. Option E is wrong because policy rules are created and managed inside firewall, NAT, IPS, or threat policies, not as independent Shared Objects. Reference topics: Security Director, Shared Objects, address objects, Geo IP, policy enforcement groups.

The correct answer is A. Manually configure and apply an SSL proxy profile. HTTPS traffic is encrypted, so ATP Cloud cannot extract and submit downloaded files for malware analysis unless the SRX can decrypt the SSL/TLS session first. Juniper’s ATP Cloud documentation states that to detect malware in HTTPS traffic, you must configure the SSL inspection CA used for SSL forward proxy, and the ATP Cloud policy workflow specifically includes configuring an SSL proxy profile to inspect HTTPS traffic. Juniper’s example shows the SSL proxy profile being created with a root CA and then applied so HTTPS sessions can be inspected before advanced anti-malware processing occurs.

Option B is wrong because lowering the threat score only changes the enforcement threshold after a file verdict is returned; it does not solve the inability to inspect encrypted payloads. Option C is wrong because changing the ATP device profile alone does not decrypt HTTPS traffic. The exhibit already shows a malware profile and HTTP file-download configuration, but HTTPS malware detection still requires SSL proxy. Option D is wrong because Junos ATP Cloud integration does not require redirecting encrypted traffic to a separate decryption appliance for this task. The SRX performs SSL forward proxy locally, then advanced anti-malware can inspect extracted content. Reference topics: ATP Cloud, HTTPS malware inspection, SSL forward proxy, SSL inspection CA, advanced anti-malware policy.

The correct answers are B and C. In an SRX chassis cluster, the fabric connection is represented by two logical fabric interfaces: fab0 and fab1. Juniper configuration examples show fab0 assigned to the node0-side fabric member interface and fab1 assigned to the node1-side fabric member interface; for example, Juniper shows fab0 using a node0 interface such as ge-0/0/1 and fab1 using a node1 interface such as ge-7/0/1. That eliminates option A, because fab0 and fab1 are not both independently located on both nodes; they represent the two node sides of the cluster fabric link.

Option C is also correct. Juniper states that only the same type of interfaces can be configured as fabric children, and for dual fabric links both child interface types should match, such as Gigabit Ethernet with Gigabit Ethernet or 10-Gigabit Ethernet with 10-Gigabit Ethernet. Option D is therefore wrong because mixed media types are not supported for the redundant fabric child interfaces. Reference topics: HA Clustering, chassis cluster fabric interfaces, fab0/fab1, redundant fabric links, fabric child interface requirements.

The correct answers are A and C. In an SRX chassis cluster, redundant Ethernet interfaces are configured as reth interfaces. Juniper defines a reth interface as a pseudointerface that includes at least one physical interface from each node in the cluster. Therefore, assigning a physical interface from node0 and a physical interface from node1 to the same reth interface is mandatory for redundant Ethernet operation. Juniper also states that before configuring chassis cluster redundant Ethernet interfaces, you must set the number of redundant Ethernet interfaces.

Option C maps to the required reth-count configuration under the chassis cluster hierarchy. Without defining the number of reth interfaces, Junos does not know how many redundant Ethernet pseudointerfaces are available for the cluster configuration. Option B is wrong because setting a retry interval is not a required step for creating a reth interface or redundancy group. Option D is wrong because heartbeat behavior belongs to cluster control-link monitoring and chassis-cluster node health, not to the required configuration steps for Ethernet reth membership. The required design steps are: define reth capacity, create/configure the reth interface, assign child physical links from both nodes, and associate the reth with the proper redundancy group. Reference topics: HA Clustering, redundant Ethernet interfaces, reth-count, reth child interfaces, redundancy groups.