Juniper Updated JN0-336 Exam Questions and Answers by paloma

The correct answers are A and C. In SSL forward proxy, the SRX sits between internal clients and external SSL/TLS servers. Juniper’s SSL proxy configuration documentation shows that a forward proxy profile is created when root-ca is configured and server-certificate is not configured. This root CA is used by the SRX to generate substitute certificates for intercepted SSL sessions, so internal clients must trust the CA used by the firewall. Juniper’s procedure specifically includes generating or loading a local certificate and applying it as the root-ca in the SSL proxy profile.

Option C is also correct because forward proxy terminates the client-side SSL session and establishes a separate SSL session toward the destination server. Juniper states that the SSL proxy acts as an SSL server to the client and establishes a new SSL session to the server; from the server’s perspective, the SRX is the SSL client. Option B is wrong because forward proxy intercepts the server certificate and creates a substitute certificate; forwarding the actual server certificate unchanged is associated with reverse proxy behavior. Option D is wrong because Encrypted Traffic Insights is not the required forward-proxy mechanism here. Reference topics: SSL Proxy, SSL forward proxy, root CA, client protection, certificate interception.

The correct answers are B and D. IKE Phase 2 negotiates the IPsec security associations used to protect actual user data through the VPN tunnel. Juniper explains that after Phase 1 establishes a secure authenticated channel, Phase 2 negotiates SAs for the data transmitted through the IPsec tunnel. A Phase 2 proposal includes the IPsec security protocol, which is either ESP or AH, along with selected encryption and authentication algorithms. In the wording of this question, that maps to the tunnel/security protocol property.

Option D, Perfect Forward Secrecy, is also correct because Phase 2 proposals can specify a Diffie-Hellman group when PFS is desired. PFS forces a new DH key exchange for Phase 2 keys so that compromise of earlier keying material does not expose later IPsec encryption keys. Option A is wrong because routing protocols are not negotiated by IKE Phase 2; routing is handled separately over or toward the tunnel interface. Option C is wrong because aggressive mode is an IKEv1 Phase 1 exchange mode, not a Phase 2 property. Juniper specifically states that Phase 2 always uses quick mode in IKEv1. Reference topics: IKE Phase 2, IPsec SA negotiation, ESP/AH, Perfect Forward Secrecy, quick mode.

The correct answer is C. device policy rules. In Junos Space Security Director, a firewall rule that must apply uniquely to one SRX Series device belongs in the device-specific policy layer, not in global or group-level policy. Juniper’s Security Director documentation states that a device can have a device-specific policy and can also be part of multiple group policies; the rule processing order places policies applied before device-specific policies first, then device-specific policies, then policies applied after device-specific policies. Juniper also explains that rules applied before device-specific policies take priority and cannot be overridden, while rules applied after device-specific policies can be overridden by adding a rule in the device-specific policy.

Option A is wrong because all-devices prerules are global mandatory rules applied before device-specific policy, not unique device exceptions. Option B is wrong because group policy prerules apply to a group of devices, not one specific SRX. Option D is wrong because all-devices postrules are still global policy rules, although they can be overridden. For a unique policy requirement on one SRX device, device policy rules are the precise Security Director construct. Reference topics: Security Director, firewall policies, device-specific policies, policy rule precedence, global/group/device rule hierarchy.

The correct answer is A. by granting access based on user roles or identities. Juniper identity-aware firewall moves enforcement beyond simple IP-address-based policy by associating traffic with authenticated users, groups, devices, and roles. Juniper states that identity parameters can be used to configure security policies so that policies provide the appropriate level of access to authenticated users. It further explains that identity helps secure access to resources based on username, roles, and groups, and that firewalls can create and enforce rules based on user identity rather than only an IP address.

This directly supports compliance because regulated environments usually require least-privilege access, auditable user-based control, and role-based authorization. Option B is wrong because identity-aware security might simplify policy operations in some cases, but network architecture simplification is not its compliance function. Option C is wrong because capacity expansion has no direct relationship to identity-based regulatory enforcement. Option D is too vague and not the mechanism being tested; confidentiality is a security goal, but identity-aware firewall enforces access decisions by mapping traffic to users and groups. Reference topics: Identity-Aware Security Policies, user identity, role-based access control, group-based policy enforcement, authentication table.