The static NAT configuration maps interface port 443 to 10.0.0.10:443, and the access-list permits HTTPS from any to the public IP (203.0.113.10). However, the access-list is applied to the 'outside' interface in the inbound direction. The static NAT is configured but the access-list entry permits traffic to host 203.0.113.10, which is the public IP.
This should work. The issue might be that the NAT is not being applied correctly because the access-list is referencing the wrong IP. Actually, the static command uses 'interface' which means the public IP of the outside interface.
The access-list permits to host 203.0.113.10, which is likely the outside interface IP. That should be fine. Wait, the exhibit shows the static mapping for tcp interface 443 to 10.0.0.10 443.
But the access-list permits to host 203.0.113.10. Since the outside interface IP is 203.0.113.10, the traffic should be permitted. However, the static command uses 'interface' which is the outside interface IP.
So it's correct. The problem might be that the access-list is applied inbound, but the static NAT translates the destination to 10.0.0.10, and then the access-list is checked after NAT? Actually, on ASA, access-lists are applied to the real IPs before NAT? This is tricky. The most likely cause is that the access-list permits traffic to the public IP but the static NAT translates it to the inside server.
However, if the access-list is applied before NAT, it should work. Actually, ASA applies access-list after NAT (by default) for inbound traffic. So the access-list should permit to the real IP (10.0.0.10).
But the access-list permits to 203.0.113.10, which is the mapped IP. That would cause a mismatch. So the correct answer is that the access-list should permit traffic to the mapped IP? Wait, I'm getting confused.
Let me think: For inbound traffic, the ASA first performs NAT (destination translation) and then applies the access-list to the real IP. So the access-list should be written to permit traffic to the real IP (10.0.0.10) after NAT. But the exhibit shows the access-list permitting to the public IP (203.0.113.10).
That is incorrect. So the issue is that the access-list is written for the public IP instead of the real IP. But the question says HTTPS connections are failing.
So the most likely cause is that the access-list is not permitting traffic to the real IP. However, let's check the options. The correct answer should be that the access-list is missing the permit for the mapped IP? Hmm.
I'll go with the explanation that the access-list should use the real IP after NAT. But the options need to be crafted accordingly. I think the typical CISSP question would say that the access-list should be applied to the real IP.
Let me adjust the options. Actually, I'll create a question where the error is that the access-list permits to the public IP but the NAT translates to a different IP? No. Let me re-read the exhibit: The access-list permits to host 203.0.113.10.
The static maps interface (which is the outside interface IP, presumably 203.0.113.10) to 10.0.0.10. So the access-list permits to the public IP, which is correct. But after NAT, the destination becomes 10.0.0.10.
The access-list is applied after NAT, so it should permit to 10.0.0.10, not 203.0.113.10. Therefore, the access-list is incorrect. So the fix would be to change the access-list to permit to host 10.0.0.10.
So the most likely cause is that the access-list is permitting traffic to the mapped IP instead of the real IP. That is a common mistake. So I'll make that the correct answer.
Let me rewrite the options.