350-701 Endpoint Protection and Detection Practice Question
Exhibit
Refer to the exhibit.
AMP for Endpoints policy JSON snippet:
{
"policy": {
"name": "Windows_Workstations",
"exclusions": {
"file": [
{
"path": "C:\\Program Files\\FinanceApp\\*.exe",
"action": "allow"
}
],
"process": [
{
"path": "C:\\Program Files\\FinanceApp\\app.exe",
"action": "allow"
}
]
},
"tetra": {
"file_reputation": {
"action_unknown": "block"
}
}
}
}Refer to the exhibit. An engineer notices that a malicious file disguised as 'app.exe' in the FinanceApp folder (SHA-256 unknown to AMP) was blocked. However, another unknown executable in the same folder was also blocked, causing a false positive. What should the engineer change in the policy to allow only the legitimate 'app.exe' while still blocking unknown executables?
⚠ Common exam trap
Cisco often tests the distinction between file exclusions (which bypass scanning) and process exclusions (which bypass behavioral analysis), and the trap here is that candidates confuse the two or assume that removing the folder exclusion entirely is the solution, rather than narrowing the exclusion to a specific file path.
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
✓
Change the file exclusion path to the exact full path of app.exe instead of a wildcard.
The current policy uses a wildcard file exclusion for the entire FinanceApp folder, which causes the AMP engine to skip scanning all files within that folder, including unknown executables. By changing the exclusion to the exact full path of the legitimate 'app.exe', only that specific file is excluded from scanning, while other unknown executables in the folder remain subject to the 'block' action for unknown files. This allows the known good file to execute without being blocked, while still blocking other unknown files that may be malicious.
Answer analysis
Option-by-option breakdown
For each option: why learners choose it and why it is or isn't the right answer here.
- ✗
Remove the file exclusion for the FinanceApp folder entirely.
Why it's wrong here
This would block the legitimate app.exe as well.
- ✗
Remove the process exclusion for app.exe.
Why it's wrong here
The process exclusion is for the specific executable; removing it might cause detection of app.exe itself.
- ✗
Change the action for unknown files from 'block' to 'detect'.
Why it's wrong here
This would allow all unknown files, reducing security.
- ✓
Change the file exclusion path to the exact full path of app.exe instead of a wildcard.
Why this is correct
A specific path exclusion for app.exe will allow it while still blocking other unknown executables in the folder.
Go deeper
Related to this question
About these practice questions
One of 978 original 350-701 practice questions on Courseiva, each with a full explanation and wrong-answer analysis — not exam dumps or protected exam content. 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.