Fortinet FCP_FWF_AD-7.4 Dumps

Wireless Intrusion Detection System (WIDS) in Fortinet’s Secure Wireless LAN (SWLAN) platform monitors for threats to the wireless environment and detects a range of attacks and misconfigurations.

The main threats detected by WIDS include:

Rogue access points: These are unauthorized APs plugged into the network, posing a security risk. WIDS scans and identifies any AP that is not part of the authorized network, flagging them as potential rogues.

Unauthorized wireless connections: WIDS can detect clients that connect to unauthorized or suspicious wireless networks, as well as unauthorized wireless devices attempting to connect to the network.

Analysis of Options:

A. Brute-force dictionary attacks:

WIDS does not specifically detect brute-force dictionary attacks against authentication. It focuses more on network topology threats and unauthorized devices.

B. Unauthorized wireless connection:

Correct. WIDS can detect unauthorized wireless connections, such as clients connecting to networks/APs that are not trusted.

C. Rogue access points:

Correct. Detecting rogue APs is a primary function of WIDS.

D. WPA2 authentication vulnerabilities:

WIDS does not specifically scan for cryptographic protocol vulnerabilities. It detects behavioral/network threats.

WPA3 introduces improvements over WPA2, most notably replacing the PSK (Pre-Shared Key) handshake with the Simultaneous Authentication of Equals (SAE) handshake.

The SAE handshake is resistant to key reinstallation attacks (KRACK) that affected WPA2.

WPA3 also improves security in open networks but does not force enterprise-only mode or universally block all legacy protocols, and 128-bit key size alone isn’t unique to WPA3.

WPA3 improves security over WPA2 by, among other things:

Using robust key establishment (SAE/Dragonfly), which is not vulnerable to KRACK (Key Reinstallation Attack).

WPA3 does not enforce only enterprise mode, nor does it universally prevent all legacy protocols, nor is 128-bit key size unique to WPA3.

Scenario Analysis:

The wireless client is redirected to a captive portal for authentication.

The authentication settings (see second exhibit) show:

Captive portal type: FQDN is selected.

Certificate: Fortinet_Factory (the default self-signed certificate).

The browser is reporting a certificate validation error when the redirection to the captive portal occurs.

Certificate Validation and Captive Portals:

When FQDN is used for captive portal redirection, the browser expects the SSLcertificate to be valid for the FQDN (e.g., “captive.company.com”).

If the certificate is self-signed or does not match the FQDN (common when using the Fortinet factory default certificate), the browser will trigger a certificate error.

This is a common issue when FQDN-based portals are used without a publicly trusted certificate matching the FQDN.

Option Analysis:

A. The FortiGate IP address in the POST parameters is using a numerical IP address

Not relevant; the browser validates the page being loaded, not the POST parameters.

B. The external server address is not the FQDN address

In this case, the external captive portal URL is using FQDN, as set in the authentication setting.

C. The used credential is not embedded in the captive portal parameters

Credential handling is not related to certificate errors; it would result in login/authentication failures, not browser SSL warnings.

D. The captive portal setting in the authentication setting is set to use FQDN as the captive portal type

Correct. When FQDN is used, the SSL certificate presented must be trusted and match the FQDN. The factory certificate will not match (it is not publicly trusted), so clients will see a validation error.

Summary:

Certificate validation fails because the captive portal is accessed via FQDN, but the FortiGate presents its self-signed factory certificate, which does not match the FQDN or is not trusted by browsers.

Debug Output Review:

The logs show repeated attempts to connect, with multiple msg: WPA ENTERPRISE TRANSITION and WPA NON-ENTERPRISE TRANSITION events.

There are repeated authentication frame exchanges, but several entries show failure messages, including incomplete handshake and RADIUS/authentication failures.

The client is unable to complete the full authentication process—typical indicators of incorrect credentials (failed RADIUS authentication) and failure in the WPA handshake process.

Unsuccessful association—No; the client does associate but fails at authentication/handshake.

C. Client denied after many attempts—No evidence the client itself is denying; it’s failing at the network’s authentication step.

FortiPresence is Fortinet’s Wi-Fi analytics/cloud presence platform.

FortiAPs can be managed directly by FortiGate or FortiLAN Cloud and connect their analytics/events to the FortiPresence cloud for presence analytics.

FortiSASE and FortiSwitch Manager do not provide FortiPresence integration for APs.

Comprehensive Detailed Step by Step Explanation from all your Knowledge and Guides availableExhibit Analysis:

The screenshot displays two FortiAPs (FP231FT and FP23JFT) in the wireless controller’s managed APs list.

Both APs are online and connected via APs.

FP231FT shows active SSIDs (“All Tunnel Mode SSIDs”) and has 11 clients connected.

FP23JFT shows “N/A” for all SSIDs and “0” clients.

Diagnosis:

“N/A” for SSIDs on FP23JFT clearly indicates it is not broadcasting any SSID.

Both APs are running the same OS version and have their respective FortiAP profiles assigned.

Evaluating the Options:

A. Enable the radios on the FAP23JF FortiAP profile.

Correct: If the radios (2.4GHz/5GHz) are disabled in the FortiAP profile, the AP will not broadcast any SSID, resulting in “N/A” and “0 clients”. This is a common issue seen in FortiOS Wireless LAN management.

This matches the symptom, as the AP is online (communicating with the controller), but has no active radio (hence, no SSID is broadcasted).

B. Replace the FortiAP device model to match the other device.

Incorrect. FortiOS supports different models in the same deployment, as long as the correct profile is applied.

C. Disable the override setting on the FortiAP that is preventing it from broadcasting SSIDs.

Misleading. Unless an override has specifically disabled SSID broadcasting, this is not directly indicated by the screenshot. Usually, radio disabled at profile is the root cause.

D. Assign the FAP231F FortiAP profile to the problematic FortiAP device.

Incorrect. The correct profile (FAP23JF) is already assigned to FP23JFT; assigning a mismatched profile can cause more issues and is not best practice.

Guide Reference & Reasoning:

FortiOS Administration Guide – Wireless Section:

When an AP is online but SSIDs are not broadcasted and “N/A” appears for radio slots, it strongly points to the radios being disabled in the FortiAP profile (see Wireless Controller > Managed FortiAPs).

The guide explains that “If the radios are disabled in the profile, the AP will not broadcast any SSID. To resolve, enable the radios (2.4GHz, 5GHz) in the FortiAP profile and reapply or reboot the AP”.

FortiAP Profile Settings:

Go to WiFi & Switch Controller > FortiAP Profiles.

Edit the FAP23JF profile.

Check both “Radio 1” and “Radio 2” (enable if disabled).

Save the changes and ensure the profile is pushed to the AP.

Typical Steps to Fix:

Log into the FortiGate.

Navigate to WiFi & Switch Controller > FortiAP Profiles.

Edit the FAP23JF profile.

Under the radio settings, ensure both radios are set to “Enable”.

Apply the changes.

The AP will now broadcast the SSIDs as configured.

Summary:

The problem is caused by disabled radios in the FAP23JF FortiAP profile. Enabling the radios in the profile will allow the AP to start broadcasting SSIDs.

Final Answer: A. Enable the radios on the FAP23JF FortiAP profile.

The scenario involves employees connecting via remote FortiAP (FAP) devices, with a requirement to enforce corporate security policies for all wireless stations at branch/remote sites.

Teleworker topology (also called remote AP, or split-tunnel mode) is designed exactly for this:

FortiAP at remote sites connects to the main office FortiGate via a secure tunnel (CAPWAP over VPN or DTLS).

Traffic destined for corporate resources is tunneled back to the main office for full security inspection and policy enforcement.

Local internet-bound traffic can be split off locally (split-tunnel) or tunneled back as well (full-tunnel), based on policy.

This ensures all employee wireless sessions accessing corporate resources are subject to central security policies, without requiring local IT staff.

Option A (VPN tunnels) is part of the teleworker topology but doesn't by itself ensure wireless security enforcement or policy application for wireless stations—teleworker/split-tunnel is more precise.

Option B is impractical and unnecessary.

Option C moves resources to the cloud, but this does not ensure security enforcement for wireless clients over remote links.

Summary: Teleworker topology on FortiAP allows secure, policy-enforced connectivity from remote sites back to HQ for all wireless stations.

Exhibit Review:

The diagnostics panel for FortiAP FP231FTF2001 shows:

Tx bandwidth label: 150.54 Mbps (likely the negotiated or theoretical maximum).

Bandwidth graph (actual traffic): Transmit (Tx) bandwidth peaked at only ~3 Mbps over the last 5 minutes—far below the maximum.

Radio 1 (2.4 GHz) shows 10 interfering SSIDs and 40% channel utilization.

Radio 2 (5 GHz) is not the focus in the current graph.

Interpretation:

The significant difference between the potential (label) and actual (graph) throughput indicates that something is preventing the AP from delivering full speed.

This could be resource overload (e.g., too many clients, too much interference, CPU/memory constraints), leading to overall reduced throughput for all users.

The graph represents real-time/actual usage, not just the theoretical capability.

Option Breakdown:

A. Resources on FortiAP are overloaded which limits speed rates for all users

Correct. Overload (either due to too many clients, high interference, or hardware resources) is a logical reason why actual throughput is far below the possible maximum.

B. Label values are historical and provide average bandwidth

Incorrect. The label reflects the maximum link rate or negotiated data rate, not an average or historical usage value.

C. FortiAP is dual band and is transmitting data faster with a higher frequency band

Not supported by the evidence. The current data is for Radio 1 (2.4 GHz) and does not show high usage on either band.

D. Bandwidth is shared with other SSID signals broadcasting for nearby AP devices

While interference does share airtime, the drastic drop in throughput strongly suggests an overload or other limiting factor on this AP.

Summary:

The large gap between the expected maximum (label) and the actual throughput observed suggests that resource overload is the root cause of poor wireless speeds for all users.