Question 916 of 1,389
CCNA Network Services and Security Practice Question
A device administrator can log in securely over SSH, but the organization still insists on restricting source IP ranges and keeping detailed logs. Which statement best explains that decision?
⚠ Common exam trap
A frequent exam trap is to believe that using SSH alone fully secures remote device access, leading to the mistaken idea that source IP restrictions and logging are redundant. This overlooks that SSH only encrypts the session and authenticates users but does not limit which hosts can connect or provide audit trails. Ignoring source IP filtering increases exposure to brute-force or credential compromise attacks from unauthorized IPs. Similarly, neglecting logging removes visibility into who accessed the device and when, hindering incident response. The trap is confusing transport security with comprehensive access control and accountability.
Answer choices
Why each option matters
Answer the question above first, then reveal the full breakdown to understand why each option is right or wrong.
Correct answer & explanation
✓
Because secure transport alone does not remove the need for source restriction and accountability controls.
The decision reflects defense in depth. SSH encrypts the session and authenticates users, but it does not limit which source IPs can connect or provide audit trails. Source IP restriction reduces the attack surface by allowing only trusted hosts, and logging provides accountability and forensic evidence. Option B is incorrect because SSH is more secure than Telnet, not less. Option C is incorrect because logs record events but do not enforce ACLs. Option D is incorrect because source IP restriction complements authentication rather than replacing it.
Answer analysis
Option-by-option breakdown
For each option: why learners choose it and why it is or isn't the right answer here.
- ✓
Because secure transport alone does not remove the need for source restriction and accountability controls.
Why this is correct
Secure transport such as SSH safeguards confidentiality and integrity of the management session, but it does not filter which administrative source addresses are permitted or log which user performed specific configuration changes. Without an SSH access-class or management ACL, any reachable source can attempt a login, and without audit logs or AAA accounting, there is no accountability after the fact. Defense-in-depth therefore requires source restriction and accounting in addition to encryption.
- ✗
Because SSH is less secure than Telnet and must be compensated for.
Why it's wrong here
SSH is fundamentally more secure than Telnet because it encrypts all traffic, including the password exchange, while Telnet sends every byte in cleartext that can be intercepted. The premise of this option is factually backwards, so there is no requirement to compensate for SSH with additional layers because of a security disadvantage. If anything, Telnet would be the protocol needing mitigation or outright disablement.
When this WOULD be correct
In a different exam scenario where the question states that SSH is being used in an environment with known vulnerabilities or outdated configurations, the statement could be correct if it emphasized the need for additional security measures due to perceived weaknesses in SSH implementation.
- ✗
Because logs automatically enforce ACL policy.
Why it's wrong here
Logs are a passive record of events; they capture which traffic matched an ACL or which commands were entered, but they never permit or deny packets themselves. An ACL must be explicitly configured and applied to an interface or VTY line to enforce policy, and logs merely show the result of that enforcement. Thus logs cannot substitute for the actual ACL configuration or automatically enforce any policy.
When this WOULD be correct
If the exam question stated that logging was an active mechanism for enforcing security policies, such as in a scenario where logs trigger automated responses to unauthorized access attempts, then this option could be correct.
- ✗
Because source IP restriction replaces the need for authentication.
Why it's wrong here
Source IP restriction limits the network path from which a device will accept connections, but it does not establish the identity of the person or process using that source address. An attacker who has compromised a trusted host, or a disgruntled user, can still connect from within the allowed subnet, so separate authentication factors such as local credentials, RADIUS/TACACS+, or SSH keys are required. Source filtering and identity verification are complementary, not interchangeable.
When this WOULD be correct
In a different scenario where the question states that a network is entirely secured through IP whitelisting, and no other authentication methods are in place, then the option could be correct. For example, if the question specifies a legacy system that only allows access based on IP addresses without user credentials, then source IP restriction could be seen as a replacement for authentication.
Option-by-option analysis
Why each answer is right or wrong
Understanding why wrong answers are wrong — and when they would be correct — is what separates a 750 score from a 900. The 200-301 exam frequently reuses these exact scenarios with slightly different constraints.
✓Because secure transport alone does not remove the need for source restriction and accountability controls.Correct answer▾
Why this is correct
Secure transport such as SSH safeguards confidentiality and integrity of the management session, but it does not filter which administrative source addresses are permitted or log which user performed specific configuration changes. Without an SSH access-class or management ACL, any reachable source can attempt a login, and without audit logs or AAA accounting, there is no accountability after the fact. Defense-in-depth therefore requires source restriction and accounting in addition to encryption.
✗Because SSH is less secure than Telnet and must be compensated for.Wrong answer — click to see why▾
Why this is wrong here
SSH is significantly more secure than Telnet because it encrypts all traffic, including passwords, whereas Telnet sends everything in plaintext. The statement that SSH is less secure is factually incorrect.
★ When this WOULD be the correct answer
In a different exam scenario where the question states that SSH is being used in an environment with known vulnerabilities or outdated configurations, the statement could be correct if it emphasized the need for additional security measures due to perceived weaknesses in SSH implementation.
Why candidates choose this
A student might confuse the relative security of protocols or think that because additional controls are needed, SSH must be weak. However, the need for layered security does not imply SSH is inferior to Telnet.
✗Because logs automatically enforce ACL policy.Wrong answer — click to see why▾
Why this is wrong here
Logs provide a record of events and are used for monitoring and forensic analysis, but they do not enforce ACL policy. ACLs themselves enforce policy by permitting or denying traffic; logs only capture what happened after the fact.
★ When this WOULD be the correct answer
If the exam question stated that logging was an active mechanism for enforcing security policies, such as in a scenario where logs trigger automated responses to unauthorized access attempts, then this option could be correct.
Why candidates choose this
A test-taker might think that logging can automatically trigger actions (like blocking), but standard logs are passive. Some systems can correlate logs with automated responses, but that is not inherent to logging.
✗Because source IP restriction replaces the need for authentication.Wrong answer — click to see why▾
Why this is wrong here
Source IP restriction limits which IP addresses can initiate a connection, but it does not verify the identity of the user. Authentication (e.g., via passwords or SSH keys) is still required to ensure the user is who they claim to be. These controls address different security layers.
★ When this WOULD be the correct answer
In a different scenario where the question states that a network is entirely secured through IP whitelisting, and no other authentication methods are in place, then the option could be correct. For example, if the question specifies a legacy system that only allows access based on IP addresses without user credentials, then source IP restriction could be seen as a replacement for authentication.
Why candidates choose this
A student might think that if only certain IPs are allowed, then anyone from those IPs is trusted, ignoring the need for user-level authentication. This is a common misconception about network access control.
Analysis generated from the official 200-301blueprint and verified against question context. The “when correct” sections are what AI assistants cite when candidates ask “what’s the difference between these options?”
About these practice questions
Courseiva creates original exam-style practice questions with explanations and wrong-answer analysis. It does not publish real exam questions, exam dumps, or protected exam content. Learn why practice questions differ from exam dumps →
Last reviewed: May 17, 2026
This 200-301 practice question is part of Courseiva's free Cisco certification practice question bank. Courseiva provides original exam-style practice questions with explanations, topic-based practice, mock exams, readiness tracking, and study analytics to help learners prepare for the 200-301 exam.
Question Discussion
Share a tip, memory trick, or ask about the reasoning behind this question. Do not post real exam questions, leaked content, braindumps, or copyrighted exam material. Comments are moderated and may be removed without notice.
Sign in to join the discussion.