hardMultiple ChoiceObjective-mapped
350-701 Practice Question: During a security audit, a penetration tester…
During a security audit, a penetration tester discovers that a Cisco ASA firewall is configured with a rule that permits traffic from the inside interface with a source IP address in the RFC 1918 range to the outside interface. The rule uses the 'inspect' command for HTTP and FTP. Which potential vulnerability does this configuration introduce?
⚠ Common exam trap
Cisco often tests the misconception that 'inspect' commands automatically provide full security, when in reality they only perform stateful inspection and protocol compliance, not antispoofing or anti-spoofing protections like uRPF.
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
✓
The firewall may allow IP spoofing if antispoofing is not enabled
The configuration permits traffic from RFC 1918 private IP addresses on the inside interface to the outside interface without any explicit antispoofing or Unicast Reverse Path Forwarding (uRPF) check. This allows an attacker on the inside network to spoof source IP addresses that appear to come from the inside subnet, bypassing the firewall's intended security boundary. Without antispoofing, the ASA will not verify that the source IP actually belongs to the inside network, enabling IP spoofing attacks.
Answer analysis
Option-by-option breakdown
For each option: why learners choose it and why it is or isn't the right answer here.
- ✗
FTP inspection permits anonymous login commands
Why it's wrong here
FTP inspection does not permit anonymous login; it handles NAT and state tracking for FTP.
- ✗
The configuration allows traffic without network address translation (NAT)
Why it's wrong here
Lack of NAT is not a vulnerability; it may be intentional for internal networks.
- ✗
The HTTP inspection may allow SQL injection attacks to bypass the firewall
Why it's wrong here
HTTP inspection does not inherently allow SQL injection; it parses HTTP traffic but does not prevent application-layer attacks like SQL injection.
- ✓
The firewall may allow IP spoofing if antispoofing is not enabled
Why this is correct
Permitting RFC 1918 addresses from the inside without antispoofing checks can allow an attacker to spoof internal IP addresses.
Visual reference
Go deeper
Related to this question
About these practice questions
This 350-701 question is part of Courseiva's 978-question bank — original exam-style content with full explanations and wrong-answer analysis, never real exam questions or exam dumps. Learn why practice questions differ from exam dumps →
JA
Written by Johnson Ajibi, MSc IT Security
Senior Network & Security Engineer · founder of Courseiva
This 350-701 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 350-701 exam.