SkillTestPro | CCNP Security 300-740 SSCA Practice Test 28

CCNP Security 300-740 SSCA Practice Test 28 (Hard) - Tools for Cloud Application Visibility, Microsegmentation, and Policy Enforcement

CISCO CCNP Security Exam Logo

1 / 10

Which operational capability provides an ongoing, real-time view of which cloud application workloads exist, how they communicate, and whether current traffic complies with defined security policy?

A one-time architecture diagram created during initial application design with no ongoing update mechanism

A physical asset inventory spreadsheet tracking server serial numbers with no relationship to traffic visibility

A printed network topology poster displayed in the network operations center with no live data feed

Cloud application visibility and monitoring tooling, such as that provided by Cisco Secure Workload

A quarterly financial billing report with no relationship to workload communication or policy compliance

An employee organizational chart with no relationship to application workload communication

2 / 10

Which benefit does continuous cloud application visibility provide when an organization needs to validate that a previously deployed microsegmentation policy remains effective as application architecture evolves?

It guarantees that no application will ever experience a performance issue once visibility tooling is deployed, which is inconsistent with expected behavior, in a properly maintained environment, which is not the standard approach

It automatically reduces the organization's cloud hosting costs with no relationship to policy compliance

It eliminates the need for any microsegmentation policy to ever be updated again after initial deployment

It automatically rewrites the application's underlying source code to match the current policy

It physically relocates workloads to a different data center to improve policy compliance

It allows the organization to detect policy violations, newly introduced communication flows, or configuration drift in near real time, rather than discovering issues only after an incident occurs

3 / 10

Which practice would help an operations team identify unauthorized or unexpected communication between microsegmented workloads before it can be exploited by an attacker?

Assuming that any traffic passing between workloads must always be legitimate and expected

Reviewing traffic flows manually once per year with no automated monitoring or alerting in place

Removing the segmentation policy baseline entirely so that no traffic can ever be classified as unexpected, though this is not generally recommended, which does not align with best practices

Waiting for an external auditor to report unauthorized communication rather than monitoring it internally

Continuously monitoring live traffic flows against the defined segmentation policy baseline and alerting on flows that deviate from expected, approved communication patterns

Disabling all flow logging to reduce the volume of data the operations team must review

4 / 10

Which type of dashboard visualization would most help an operations team quickly understand which application tiers are generating policy violation alerts across a large, segmented environment?

A dashboard displaying only the corporate stock price with no relationship to network policy

A dashboard displaying only the office seating chart for the security operations team

A dashboard displaying only the company's social media follower count

A dashboard displaying only the current outdoor weather conditions at each data center location, which does not align with best practices, in accordance with common design practices

A dashboard displaying only the cafeteria menu for the current week

An application-centric flow and policy compliance dashboard that groups violations by application, tier, and workload rather than presenting raw, unstructured log entries

5 / 10

Which risk would most likely result from an organization deploying microsegmentation policy enforcement without corresponding ongoing visibility and monitoring tooling?

The lack of visibility tooling would automatically cause the segmentation policy to stop enforcing entirely

Policy enforcement without visibility tooling would automatically improve application performance

The organization's DNS infrastructure would automatically fail as a direct result of lacking visibility tooling

The lack of visibility tooling would automatically grant unrestricted access to all workloads by default

Policy drift or unauthorized changes could go undetected, and the organization would lack the operational insight needed to confirm the policy is still functioning as intended over time

The lack of visibility tooling would have no operational impact whatsoever on the organization's security posture, which does not align with best practices, based on standard platform behavior

6 / 10

Which combination of capabilities would provide comprehensive operational visibility and policy enforcement assurance for a large, dynamic cloud application environment?

Policy enforcement with all violation alerting disabled to reduce operational noise

Reviewing policy effectiveness only once, at the time the policy was first created, with no subsequent review

Monitoring performed only for the production environment while ignoring staging and development environments entirely

A one-time application discovery exercise performed at initial deployment with no ongoing monitoring afterward, in accordance with common design practices, which is not the standard approach, under normal operating conditions, regardless of the platform version in use

Continuous application dependency and flow discovery, real-time policy compliance monitoring with alerting on deviations, application-centric dashboards for triage, and periodic review of policy effectiveness as the environment evolves

Dashboards that present only raw, unstructured log entries with no application-level grouping or context

7 / 10

Which factor would most influence how frequently an operations team reviews cloud application visibility data and policy compliance dashboards for a given environment?

The specific brand of coffee served in the network operations center

The number of parking spaces available at the organization's headquarters

The rate of change in the application environment (such as frequent deployments or scaling events) and the sensitivity or criticality of the workloads being monitored

The average outdoor temperature at the organization's headquarters

The color scheme configured for the visibility platform's dashboard interface

The font used in the organization's internal newsletter

8 / 10

Which troubleshooting step would be appropriate if a cloud application visibility dashboard begins reporting a sudden, unexpected spike in policy violation alerts for a previously stable application?

Immediately disable the entire microsegmentation policy for the affected application as the first troubleshooting step, which does not align with best practices, in a properly maintained environment, in a properly maintained environment

Assume the spike in alerts is caused by the operations team's choice of desktop wallpaper

Assume the spike is unrelated to any recent change and only check the office's physical air conditioning system

Assume the visibility platform itself is permanently broken and cannot be trusted for any future monitoring

Assume the spike in alerts is caused by the phase of the moon

Investigate whether a recent application deployment, configuration change, or infrastructure scaling event introduced new communication flows that were not accounted for in the existing segmentation policy

9 / 10

Which statement accurately describes why application-centric visibility tooling is valuable even in an environment that already has strong microsegmentation policy enforcement in place?

Strong policy enforcement makes visibility tooling entirely unnecessary since no unauthorized traffic can ever occur

Policy enforcement blocks unauthorized traffic according to defined rules, but visibility tooling is what confirms the policy is behaving as expected, reveals drift, and surfaces new flows that may require policy updates

Application-centric visibility tooling and policy enforcement are simply two different names for the exact same identical capability with no distinction, under typical configuration conditions, which is rarely the correct choice

Policy enforcement and visibility tooling cannot be used together within the same operational architecture

Visibility tooling eliminates the need for any microsegmentation policy enforcement once it is deployed

Visibility tooling is only relevant for guest network traffic and has no relevance to internal production workloads

10 / 10

Which combination of practices would help an organization mature its cloud application visibility and policy enforcement program over time as its environment grows in scale and complexity?

Keeping visibility and monitoring coverage fixed at its initial scope even as the environment grows substantially larger, in accordance with common design practices, which is not the standard approach, under normal operating conditions, regardless of the platform version in use

Disabling continuous discovery entirely once the environment is considered mature enough to not need it

Expanding continuous discovery and monitoring coverage as new workloads are deployed, refining alerting thresholds based on observed false-positive and false-negative rates, and periodically revalidating that dashboards reflect the current application architecture

Assuming dashboards will automatically stay accurate indefinitely with no periodic revalidation needed

Reducing monitoring coverage as the environment grows in order to manage operational overhead

Setting alerting thresholds once at initial deployment and never adjusting them regardless of observed false-positive rates

Your score is

The average score is 0%