mediummultiple choiceObjective-mapped

Exhibit

Network and endpoint logs for workstation WS-204

10:12:08  DNS query from WS-204 to 10.20.1.15 for wpad.corp.local
10:12:09  HTTP request from WS-204 to 10.20.1.15 for /wpad.dat
10:12:10  Proxy auto-detect enabled in browser policy
10:12:11  Traffic from WS-204 now exits through proxy 10.20.1.15

Asset inventory:
- 10.20.1.15 = CORP-PROXY01
- CORP-PROXY01 is listed as the approved outbound web proxy

Based on the exhibit, what is the most likely explanation for the alert?

Question 1mediummultiple choice
Full question →

Based on the exhibit, what is the most likely explanation for the alert?

Answer choices

Why each option matters

Good practice is not just finding the correct option. The wrong answers often show the exact trap the exam wants you to fall into.

A

Best answer

The workstation has been redirected to an approved corporate proxy, so the event is expected.

The exhibit shows the workstation resolving WPAD, retrieving the proxy auto-configuration file, and then sending traffic to the approved proxy listed in inventory. Those steps match normal browser proxy discovery, not malicious behavior. Because the destination is the known corporate proxy, the alert should be validated as legitimate and then tuned if it repeatedly fires on the same approved sequence.

B

Distractor review

A DNS cache poisoning attack is in progress and the workstation is now using a rogue gateway.

A poisoned cache would usually point traffic to an unexpected address. Here, the destination matches the approved proxy inventory entry.

C

Distractor review

The endpoint is infected with malware that is hiding its traffic through encrypted tunnels.

There is no evidence of suspicious processes, unexpected destinations, or command execution. The logs show browser proxy discovery behavior.

D

Distractor review

The workstation is under a denial-of-service attack because it sent repeated DNS lookups.

The sequence is short and intentional, not a flood. WPAD and proxy discovery normally generate these requests during browser startup.

Common exam trap

Common exam trap: NAT rules depend on direction and matching traffic

NAT is not only about the public address. The inside/outside interface roles and the ACL or rule that matches traffic are just as important.

Technical deep dive

How to think about this question

NAT questions usually test address translation, overload/PAT behaviour, static mappings and whether the right traffic is being translated. Read the interface direction and address terms carefully.

KKey Concepts to Remember

  • Static NAT maps one inside address to one outside address.
  • PAT allows many inside hosts to share one public address using ports.
  • Inside local and inside global describe the private and translated addresses.
  • NAT ACLs identify traffic for translation, not always security filtering.

TExam Day Tips

  • Identify inside and outside interfaces first.
  • Check whether the scenario needs static NAT, dynamic NAT or PAT.
  • Do not confuse NAT matching ACLs with normal packet-filtering intent.

Related practice questions

Related SY0-701 practice-question pages

Use these pages to review the topic behind this question. This is how one missed question becomes focused revision.

More questions from this exam

Keep practising from the same exam bank, or move into a focused topic page if this question exposed a weak area.

FAQ

Questions learners often ask

What does this SY0-701 question test?

Static NAT maps one inside address to one outside address.

What is the correct answer to this question?

The correct answer is: The workstation has been redirected to an approved corporate proxy, so the event is expected. — The most likely explanation is that the workstation is using the approved corporate proxy through normal browser auto-discovery. The exhibit shows DNS resolution for the proxy auto-configuration host, retrieval of the PAC file, and traffic exiting through a proxy that is explicitly listed as approved in inventory. That is a normal operational pattern, so the alert is most likely benign and should be categorized accordingly. Why others are wrong: The evidence does not show a rogue address, unusual process behavior, or traffic flooding. DNS cache poisoning would redirect users to an unexpected host, but the destination here is the known proxy. There is no sign of malware execution or denial-of-service conditions. The logs align with expected proxy auto-detection behavior in a managed environment.

What should I do if I get this SY0-701 question wrong?

Then try more questions from the same exam bank and focus on understanding why the wrong options are tempting.

Discussion

Loading comments…

Sign in to join the discussion.