FCP_FAZ_AN-7.4 FCP - FortiAnalyzer 7.4 Analyst Questions and Answers

The topology shows a Security Fabric setup involving FortiGate devices (FGT-A and FGT-B) and a FortiAnalyzer for centralized logging. Let’s break down the logging and traffic flow behavior:

Traffic Flow Analysis:

Client-1 initiates web traffic directed to the internet, which is routed through FGT-B and then FGT-A before reaching the internet. This is indicated by the direction of the red-dashed arrow from Client-1 through FGT-B to FGT-A.

Policy and NAT Settings:

On FGT-B, NAT is disabled, meaning it will pass the traffic through without altering the source IP. This device has a Web Filter enabled with a policy to log violations only.

On FGT-A, NAT is enabled, and a Web Filter profile is also applied. Like FGT-B, it logs only violations for web filtering.

Logging Behavior:

Since both FortiGate devices have logging enabled for traffic and web filtering, they can create logs if conditions are met.

FGT-B will log all traffic, as per its configuration, and will also create web filter logs if it detects a violation, as the web filter profile is applied. Because NAT is disabled on FGT-B, it processes the traffic but doesn’t perform any address translation, allowing it to see the original source IP of Client-1.

FGT-A, as the Security Fabric root, will handle NAT and forward the traffic to the internet. However, in this case, the question is focused on where the traffic and web filter logs would be generated first, particularly by FGT-B.

Option Analysis:

Option A - Only FGT-B will create traffic logs: This is incorrect because FGT-B can create both traffic logs and web filter logs if it detects a violation.

Option B - FGT-B will see the MAC address of FGT-A and notify FGT-A to log: This is not how logging works in this setup. Each FortiGate logs independently based on configured policies.

Option C - FGT-B will create traffic logs and will create web filter logs if it detects a violation: This is correct, as FGT-B has logging enabled and will log traffic and web filter violations.

Option D - Only FGT-A will create web filter logs if it detects a violation: This is incorrect, as FGT-B can also log web filter violations independently.

Conclusion:

Correct Answer: C. FGT-B will create traffic logs and will create web filter logs if it detects a violation.

FGT-B is responsible for logging the traffic from Client-1 and will generate web filter logs if there is a policy violation, as configured.

References:

FortiOS 7.4.1 documentation on Security Fabric logging behavior and FortiAnalyzer log integration.

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.

In FortiAnalyzer's incident management system, analysts have the option to manually manage incidents, which includes attaching relevant reports to an incident for further investigation and documentation. This feature allows analysts to consolidate information, such as detailed reports on suspicious activity, into an incident record, providing a comprehensive view for incident response.

Let's review the other options to clarify why they are incorrect:

Option A: You can manually attach generated reports to incidents

This is correct. FortiAnalyzer allows analysts to manually attach reports to incidents, which is beneficial for providing additional context, evidence, or analysis related to the incident. This functionality is part of the incident management process and helps streamline information for tracking and resolution.

Option B: The status of the incident is always linked to the status of the attached event

This is incorrect. The status of an incident on FortiAnalyzer is managed independently of the status of any attached events. An incident can contain multiple events, each with different statuses, but the incident itself is tracked separately.

Option C: Severity incidents rated with the level High have an initial service-level agreement (SLA) response time of 1 hour

This is incorrect. While incidents have severity levels, specific SLA response times are typically set according to the organization’s incident response policy, and FortiAnalyzer does not impose a default SLA response time of 1 hour for high-severity incidents.

Option D: Incidents must be acknowledged before they can be analyzed

This is incorrect. Incidents on FortiAnalyzer can be analyzed even if they are not yet acknowledged. Acknowledging an incident is often part of the workflow to mark it as being actively addressed, but it is not a prerequisite for analysis.

References: According to FortiAnalyzer documentation, analysts can attach reports to incidents manually, making option A correct. This feature enables better tracking and documentation within the incident management system on FortiAnalyzer​.

In a FortiAnalyzer Fabric, devices can participate in a cluster or grouping if they meet specific compatibility criteria. Based on the outputs provided, let’s evaluate these criteria:

Version Compatibility:

All three devices, FortiAnalyzer1, FortiAnalyzer2, and FortiAnalyzer3, are running version v7.4.1-build0238, which is the same across the board. This version alignment is crucial because FortiAnalyzer Fabric requires that devices run compatible firmware versions for seamless communication and management.

Platform Type and Configuration:

All three devices are configured as Standalone in the HA mode, which allows them to operate independently but does not restrict their participation in a FortiAnalyzer Fabric. Each device is also on the FAZVM64-KVM platform type, ensuring hardware compatibility.

Global Settings:

Key settings such as adm-mode, adm-status, and adom-mode are consistent across all devices (adm-mode: normal, adm-status: enable, adom-mode: normal), which aligns with requirements for fabric integration and role assignment flexibility.

Each device also has the log-forward-cache-size set, which is relevant for forwarding logs within a fabric environment.

Based on the above analysis, all devices (FortiAnalyzer1, FortiAnalyzer2, and FortiAnalyzer3) meet the requirements to be part of a FortiAnalyzer Fabric.

References: FortiAnalyzer 7.4.1 documentation outlines that devices within a FortiAnalyzer Fabric should be on the same or compatible firmware versions and hardware platforms, and they must be configured for integration. Given that all devices match the version, platform, and mode criteria, they can all be part of the FortiAnalyzer Fabric​.

The objective is to create a filter that identifies all login attempts to the FortiAnalyzer web interface (GUI) coming from Laptop1 (IP 10.1.1.100) and excludes the admin user. This filter should match any user other than admin.

Filter Components Analysis:

Operation-login: This portion of the filter will target login actions specifically, which is correct for filtering login attempts.

performed_on==’’GUI(10.1.1.100)’: This indicates that the login attempt must occur on the GUI interface and originate from the specified IP, which matches Laptop1's IP address (10.1.1.100). This ensures that the filter only matches GUI logins from this specific device.

user!=admin: This part excludes logins by the admin user, meeting the requirement to capture only non-admin users.

Option Analysis:

Option A: Correctly specifies the Operation-login, performed_on==’’GUI(10.1.1.100)’, and user!=admin. This setup effectively filters login attempts to the GUI from Laptop1, excluding the admin user.

Option B: Uses the incorrect IP 10.1.1.120 in the performed_on filter, which does not match Laptop1's IP (10.1.1.100).

Option C: This option includes srcip==10.1.1.100 and dstip==10.1.1.210 but incorrectly specifies user==admin instead of user!=admin, which does not match the requirement to exclude admin users.

Option D: This option does not specify the performed_on field to restrict it to the GUI and only includes dstip (destination IP) without srcip. It also incorrectly uses user!-admin instead of the correct syntax user!=admin.

Conclusion:

Correct Answer: A. Operation-login and performed_on==’’GUI(10.1.1.100)’ and user!=admin

This filter precisely captures the required conditions: login attempts from Laptop1 to the GUI interface by any user except admin.

References:

FortiAnalyzer 7.4.1 documentation on log filters, syntax for login operations, and GUI login tracking.

FortiAnalyzer manages and stores various types of logs, including local logs, across different ADOMs (Administrative Domains). Each type of log serves specific purposes, with some logs being ADOM-specific and others providing system-wide information.

Option A - Local Logs Not Supported in FortiView:

Local logs are indeed supported in FortiView. FortiView provides visibility and analytics for different log types across the system, including local logs, allowing users to view and analyze data efficiently.

Conclusion: Incorrect.

Option B - Playbook Logs for All ADOMs in the Root ADOM:

FortiAnalyzer allows centralized viewing of playbook logs across all ADOMs from the root ADOM. This feature provides an overarching view of playbook executions, facilitating easier monitoring and management for administrators.

Conclusion: Correct.

Option C - Event Logs vs. Application Logs:

Event Logs provide information about system-wide events, such as login attempts, configuration changes, and other critical activities that impact the overall system. These logs apply across the FortiAnalyzer instance.

Application Logs are more specific to individual ADOMs, capturing details that pertain to ADOM-specific applications and configurations.

Conclusion: Correct.

Option D - Event Logs Only in Root ADOM:

Event logs are available across different ADOMs, not exclusively in the root ADOM. They capture system-wide events, but they can be accessed within specific ADOM contexts as needed.

Conclusion: Incorrect.

Conclusion:

Correct Answer: B. You can view playbook logs for all ADOMs in the root ADOM and C. Event logs show system-wide information, whereas application logs are ADOM specific.

These answers correctly describe the characteristics and visibility of local logs within FortiAnalyzer.

References:

FortiAnalyzer 7.4.1 documentation on log types, ADOM configuration, and FortiView functionality.

In this output, we see two diagnostic commands executed on a FortiAnalyzer device:

diagnose fortilogd lograte: This command shows the rate at which logs are being processed by the FortiAnalyzer in terms of log entries per second.

diagnose fortilogd msgrate: This command displays the message rate, or the rate at which individual messages are being processed.

The values provided in the exhibit output show:

Log rate (lograte): Consistently high, showing values such as 70.0, 132.1, and 133.3 logs per second over different time intervals.

Message rate (msgrate): Lower values, around 1.4 to 1.6 messages per second.

Explanation

Interpretation of log rate vs. message rate: In FortiAnalyzer, the log rate typically refers to the rate of logs being stored or indexed, while the message rate refers to individual messages within these logs. Given that a single log entry can contain multiple messages, it's common to see a lower message rate relative to the log rate.

Understanding normal operation: In this case, the message rate being lower than the log rate is expected and typical behavior. This discrepancy can arise because each log entry may bundle multiple related messages, reducing the message rate relative to the log rate.

Conclusion

Correct Answer: A. The message rate being lower than the log rate is normal.

This aligns with the normal operational behavior of FortiAnalyzer in processing logs and messages.

There is no indication that both logs and messages are nearly finished indexing, as that would typically show diminishing rates toward zero, which is not the case here. Additionally, there’s no information in this output about specific ADOMs or a comparison between traffic logs and event logs. Thus, options B, C, and D are incorrect.

References:

FortiOS 7.4.1 and FortiAnalyzer 7.4.1 command guides for diagnose fortilogd lograte and diagnose fortilogd msgrate.

FortiAnalyzer offers several features for monitoring, alerting, and incident management, each serving different purposes. Let's examine each option to determine which one best supports a proactive security approach.

Option A - FortiView Monitor:

FortiView is a visualization tool that provides real-time and historical insights into network traffic, threats, and logs. While it gives visibility into network activity, it is generally more reactive than proactive, as it relies on existing log data and incidents.

Conclusion: Incorrect.

Option B - Outbreak Alert Services:

Outbreak Alert Services in FortiAnalyzer notify administrators of emerging threats and outbreaks based on FortiGuard intelligence. This is beneficial for awareness of potential threats but does not offer a hands-on, investigative approach. It’s more of a notification service rather than an active, proactive investigation tool.

Conclusion: Incorrect.

Option C - Incidents Dashboard:

The Incidents Dashboard provides a summary of incidents and current security statuses within the network. While it assists with ongoing incident response, it is used to manage and track existing incidents rather than proactively identifying new threats.

Conclusion: Incorrect.

Option D - Threat Hunting:

Threat Hunting in FortiAnalyzer enables security analysts to actively search for hidden threats or malicious activities within the network by leveraging historical data, analytics, and intelligence. This is a proactive approach as it allows analysts to seek out threats before they escalate into incidents.

Conclusion: Correct.

Conclusion:

Correct Answer: D. Threat hunting

Threat hunting is the most proactive feature among the options, as it involves actively searching for threats within the network rather than reacting to already detected incidents.

References:

FortiAnalyzer 7.4.1 documentation on Threat Hunting and proactive security measures.

The FortiSOAR management extension is designed as an independent security orchestration, automation, and response (SOAR) solution that integrates with other Fortinet products but requires its own dedicated device or virtual machine (VM) environment. FortiSOAR is not natively integrated as a container or service within FortiAnalyzer or FortiManager, and it operates separately to manage complex security workflows and incident responses across various platforms.

Let’s examine each option to determine the correct answer:

Option A: It requires a FortiManager configured to manage FortiGate

This is incorrect. FortiSOAR operates independently of FortiManager. While FortiSOAR can receive input or data from FortiGate (often managed by FortiManager), it does not require FortiManager to be part of its setup.

Option B: It runs as a docker container on FortiAnalyzer

This is incorrect. FortiSOAR does not run as a container within FortiAnalyzer. It requires its own dedicated environment, either as a physical device or a virtual machine, due to the resource requirements and specialized functions it performs.

Option C: It requires a dedicated FortiSOAR device or VM

This is correct. FortiSOAR is deployed as a standalone device or VM, which enables it to handle the intensive processing needed for orchestrating security operations, integrating with third-party tools, and automating responses across an organization’s security infrastructure.

Option D: It does not include a limited trial by default

This is incorrect. FortiSOAR installations may come with trial options or demos in specific scenarios, especially for evaluation purposes. This depends on licensing and deployment policies.

References: The FortiSOAR platform, as outlined in Fortinet product documentation, is a standalone SOAR solution that requires a dedicated device or VM for deployment. It integrates with Fortinet’s Security Fabric but operates separately from FortiAnalyzer, FortiManager, and FortiGate, focusing on advanced incident management and security automation​.