FirePower Access Control: Allow Traffic Without Inspection
A Cisco FirePower administrator needs to configure a rule to allow a new application that has never been seen on the network. Which two actions should be selected to allow the traffic to pass without inspection? (Choose two.)
Community Insight
The key trap is confusing 'allow' with 'permit' or assuming a single action suffices; the exam tests the specific combination of 'trust' and 'monitor' for bypassing inspection on new apps.
This question addresses how to configure Cisco FirePower (FTD) access control rules for unknown applications. The correct configuration uses 'trust' and 'monitor' actions to allow traffic while logging it without deep inspection.
Many candidates select 'permit' or 'allow', failing to realize that 'permit' is not a valid action in FTD access control rules, and 'allow' alone might still trigger some inspection depending on policy context, whereas 'trust' explicitly skips it.
Community Discussion (47 comments)
Comments & Corrections
No comments yet — spotted an error or have a note? Share it below.
Expert Analysis
Why the Answer Is Correct
In Cisco Firepower Threat Defense (FTD), the Access Control policy does not use a 'permit' action; instead, it uses 'allow'. However, the question asks for two actions to allow traffic without inspection for a new application. The specific actions designed for this purpose are 'monitor' and 'trust'. A 'monitor' rule logs traffic without blocking it, allowing the system to learn about the application. A 'trust' rule allows traffic to pass without further inspection (like IPS or malware scanning). Combining these ensures the traffic flows but is tracked and trusted.Why the Other Options Are Wrong
'Permit' (A) is not a valid action type in FTD Access Control rules; the equivalent is 'allow'. 'Allow' (B) is a valid action, but selecting 'allow' and 'trust' would be redundant or incorrect because 'trust' implies allowing. 'Reset' (C) drops the connection and sends resets, which blocks traffic rather than allowing it. 'Monitor' (E) alone logs but doesn't explicitly 'trust' the traffic against all future inspections in the same definitive way 'trust' does for known good patterns, though they are often used together. The question specifically targets the 'trust' mechanism for bypassing inspection.Community Comment Notes
Community consensus strongly supports D and E. As user rad9899 noted, 'trust' and 'monitor' are the correct pair. User west33637 explained that you create a monitor rule first, then a trust rule below it. User Dinges highlighted that 'allow' and 'trust' would conflict, whereas 'monitor' and 'trust' work sequentially. User Jayde provided an official Cisco link confirming that 'trust' evaluates traffic next, allowing it to pass without further inspection.Official Reference
Exam Strategy
Remember that FTD Access Control rules use 'allow', 'deny', 'monitor', and 'trust'. Never confuse 'permit' (ASA syntax) with 'allow' (FTD syntax). For 'no inspection' scenarios, 'trust' is the keyword.
Frequently Asked Questions
Why is 'permit' not an option in FirePower?
Firepower uses 'allow' instead of 'permit' which is found in traditional ASA CLI configurations.
What is the difference between 'allow' and 'trust'?
'Trust' allows traffic without any further security inspection (IPS, Malware), while 'allow' may still trigger some checks depending on other policies.