FCSS_LED_AR-7.6 Sample Questions Answers

From the exhibits:

SSID “Guest”

Security mode:Open

Captive Portal: Enabled, portal typeAuthentication → External

External portal URL: https://fac.trainingad.training.lab/guest (FortiAuthenticator)

Exempt destinations/services:FortiAuthenticator and WindowsAD

Firewall policy

From theGuest interface/zonetoport1 (Internet)

Source user group:guest.portal(authenticated users)

The flow for anexternal captive portalis:

Client associates to theopen Guest SSID.

Client makes an HTTP(S) request.

FortiGate intercepts and redirects the client to theexternal portal.

Client must be able toreach FortiAuthenticator’s IP(and AD if the portal needs it)before authentication.

In this setup:

Theexempt destinationsetting tells the captive portal logicnot to require authenticationfor traffic going to FortiAuthenticator and WindowsAD.

However, there still must be a firewall policy that allows traffic from the Guest SSID subnet to those exempt destinations.

The existing firewall policy uses theguest.portal user groupas a source condition, which only matchesaftersuccessful portal authentication. Before login, the client has no user identity, so:

Traffic from the unauthenticated Guest client → FortiAuthenticator isnot matchedby that policy.

It hits theimplicit deny, so the browser never reaches the login page.

To fix this, the administrator must:

Create or modify a firewall policy thatallows traffic from the Guest SSID subnet/interface to FortiAuthenticator and WindowsAD without requiring user authentication.

That is exactly what optionDdescribes.

Why the others are wrong:

A. Change SSID security mode to WPA2-Enterprise– External captive portals are normally used withopenSSIDs; WPA2-Enterprise uses 802.1X, not captive portal.

B. Disable HTTPS redirection– Redirection is required so users are sent to the portal; disabling it doesn’t solve reachability.

C. Exclude FortiAuthenticator and Windows AD from filtering– They’re already listed asexempt destinationsin the SSID configuration; the missing piece is thefirewall policy, not the exemption.

A FortiGate interface can operate with different types of captive portal modes.

The available portal types that require user interaction or login include:

✔A. Terms Acknowledgment Without Authentication

Forces users to accept terms before accessing the network

No credentials required

Still considered a captive portalCommon in guest Wi-Fi.

✔E. Authentication

Requires username/password

Supports local users, RADIUS, LDAP, OAuth, etc.

Why the other options are incorrect

❌B. Email Notification Only

Not a valid captive portal mode on FortiGate.

❌C. Disclaimer + Authentication

This is not a selectable mode; disclaimers are part of the captive portal customization but not a standalone option.

❌D. Guest Pass Access

Guest pass authentication exists onFortiAuthenticator, not as a direct portal type on FortiGate.

The SSL-VPN configuration hasRequire Client Certificateenabled. When this is enabled, FortiOS performs two checks:

Normal user authentication(username/password or PKI user)

Additional client certificate check– the client certificatemust be signed by a CA that FortiGate trusts

FortiOS documentation for “SSL VPN with certificate authentication” states:

“The client certificate only needs to be signed by a known CA in order to pass authentication.”

“The CA certificate is the certificate that signed both the server certificate and the user certificate… The CA certificate is available to be imported on the FortiGate.”

The debug output shows key lines:

__quick_check_peer-CA does not match.

Issuer of cert depth 0 is not detected in CMDB.

This tells us:

FortiGatedoes see the user’s certificate,

Butcannot find the issuing CAin its local CA certificate store (“CMDB” = configuration database).

This means theCA that signed the user certificate has not been importedinto FortiGate.

Now evaluate the options:

A. Enable Redirect HTTP to SSL-VPN– affects only redirection from HTTP to HTTPS; it has nothing to do with certificate validation.

B. Import the CA that signed the SSL VPN Server Certificate– the server certificate is already working (the portal comes up) and its CA is not what the debug complains about; the error is about thepeer (user) certificate. Often the same CA signs both, but the failing check specifically says the issuer of the client cert is not in CMDB.

C. Set the user certificate as the Server Certificate– incorrect; server and client certificates serve different roles.

D. Import the CA that signed the user certificate to FortiGate– this directly addresses the debug error and aligns with the documented requirement that the CA which issued the user certificate must be known to FortiGate.

Observed behavior:

Devices in the VLANcan ping FortiGate→ gateway reachability OK.

FortiGatecan ping devicesin that VLAN → return path OK.

Inter-VLAN routingworks → FortiGate’s L3 and policies are fine.

Devices in the same VLAN cannot ping each other→ problem is on theL2 switching plane, not L3.

On FortiSwitch (managed by FortiGate), there is a feature calledAccess VLAN(sometimes described in NAC/dynamic segmentation context):

WhenAccess VLANis enabled on a VLAN, the switchdoes not perform normal L2 forwardingbetween hosts in that VLAN.

Instead, all traffic from endpoints in that VLAN isforced upstream to FortiGate, as if every frame were destined for the gateway.

This is used for designs where you wantall intra-VLAN traffic inspected by the firewall, implementing micro-segmentation.

Resulting behavior:

Host → FortiGate: works (frames are forwarded to FortiGate).

FortiGate → Host: works (routed back).

Host A → Host B (same VLAN):

Frame from A goes to FortiGate.

FortiGate seessource and destination in same subnet; depending on policy, it may drop or not have a policy allowing that traffic.

Even if allowed, certain designs still break pure L2 expectations.

In the exam scenario, the key point is:

IfAccess VLAN is enabled,local L2 communication within that VLAN is disabled, so hosts in the same VLAN cannot communicate directly.

That perfectly explains:

Same VLAN hosts can’t ping each other

But they can both reach FortiGate and beyond

Why the other options are less likely / incorrect

B. FortiSwitch MAC address table is missing entries

If MAC table were empty/bad,nothingin that VLAN would work properly, including pinging FortiGate.

C. FortiGate ARP table is missing entries

Then FortiGate couldn’t ping the devices either; but it can.

D. Native VLAN misconfigured on ports

That would affect connectivity to FortiGate too, not only host-to-host.

When a device’sMAC address is quarantinedon a FortiSwitch (via FortiLink NAC, fabric automation, or manual quarantine), FortiSwitch enforces quarantine using thequarantine VLAN, also called theaccess VLANinside FortiSwitch NAC operations.

FortiSwitch behavior is defined in LAN Edge documentation:

Quarantined devices are moved into an"access VLAN" reserved for isolation.

This VLAN isstatically defined on the FortiGate NAC policy, and switch ports dynamically reassign the quarantined MAC into that VLAN.

All egress traffic from the quarantined MAC is forced into this VLAN, preventing access to the production network.

Thus, the correct description is:

✔Traffic is sent to an access VLAN.

Options B, C, and D are incorrect because:

Quarantine doesnotreassign to native VLAN.

It doesnotsend untagged traffic arbitrarily.

It doesnotforward traffic to allowed VLANs

From the exhibits:

FortiSwitch Ports viewshows:

port2

Mode: Static

Native VLAN: Students

Allowed VLANs: quarantine.fortilink (quarantine)

NAC policy “Training”:

Switch FortiLink: fortilink

Category:Device

Matching criteria:

MAC Address: 70:88:6b:8c:4b:0e (enabled)

Operating System:Linux(enabled)

Switch Controller Action:

Assign VLAN = Students

Bounce Port = enabled

Design intent:

Device with that MAC + OS Linux, when plugged intoport2, should be dynamically moved to VLANStudentsby the NAC policy.

Why it doesn’t work now

On FortiLink NAC,dynamic NAC decisions only apply on ports whose “Access Mode” is set to NAC:

NAC mode = FortiGate controls theonboarding VLAN, evaluates NAC policies, and then dynamically reassigns the switch port VLAN (access, quarantine, etc.).

Static mode(what we see on port2) means the port just uses its configurednative/allowed VLANs, andno NAC classificationhappens.

Right now:

port2 is astatic access portwith Native VLAN = Students.

The NAC policy exists, butFortiSwitch is not in NAC enforcement mode on that port, so the policy is never evaluated for traffic on port2.

Therefore, themissing configurationis:

Setport2toNAC mode(sometimes called “Access mode: NAC” or “NAC LAN edge port”).

Once port2 is changed to NAC mode:

Device initially lands in the onboarding/quarantine VLAN.

FortiGate collects device info (MAC, OS, etc.).

NAC policy “Training” matches MAC + Linux.

Switch controller actionAssign VLAN = Studentsis applied.

Port is bounced (if configured), bringing the device back up in VLAN Students.

Why the other options are wrong

B. MAC or OS misconfigured

Possible in general, but the question asks forwhich configuration is missing, and the exhibits clearly focus on port mode. Also, even with wrong MAC/OS, the port would still be in NAC mode; here NAC isn’t even active.

C. Port Policy mode

Port policy (edge/trunk) is separate from NAC; NAC requires the specificNAC access mode.

D. Students VLAN should be Allowed VLANs instead of Native VLAN

For an access port, having Students as thenative VLANis correct. NAC policy’s Assign VLAN will set that as access VLAN; no need to make it an allowed trunk VLAN.

From the FortiManager NAC policy:

Category =Device

Match criteria includeMAC addressandOperating System = Linux

Action =Assign VLAN “Students”

From the FortiGate CLI:

diagnose switch-controller switch-info mac-table ...

MAC: 70:88:6b:8c:4a:ce VLAN: 4089 Port: port2

diagnose switch-controller mac-device mac onboard­ing

VLAN 4089 MAC 70:88:6b:8c:4a:ce

So the device is stuck inVLAN 4089, which is theonboarding VLAN. No NAC policy is matched.

For a NAC policy to match, FortiGate needsdevice-identity information, which comes fromdevice detection on the VLAN / FortiLink interfaceplus theattributes that the policy expects(OS, MAC, etc.).

A. Device detection is not enabled on VLAN 4089.

If device detection is disabled on the interface/VLAN where the endpoint lives, FortiGate cannot learn OS / device info.

Without this, the NAC engine cannot compare against the NAC policy (which relies on OS and other attributes), so the device remains in the onboarding VLAN.✅This is a valid root cause.

B. The device operating system detected by FortiGate is not Linux.

The NAC policy explicitly requiresOperating System = Linux.

If the endpoint is actually Windows/macOS, or the OS fingerprint is still “Unknown”, the policy will never match, and the device stays in onboarding.✅Also a valid reason.

C. Management communication between FortiGate and FortiSwitch is down.

CLI output (switch-info mac-table and mac-device) proves FortiGate is talking to the switch and sees MAC/VLAN/port information.❌Not a valid reason.

D. The MAC address configured on the NAC policy is incorrect.

The exhibits show the MAC in the NAC policy matches the MAC appearing in the MAC table.❌Not the cause here.

In a LAN Edge deployment:

FortiSwitch is managedthrough FortiGate via FortiLink.

FortiAIOps integrates withFortiGateas the single managed device; from there it gains visibility intoall Fabric and LAN-edge devices(FortiSwitch, FortiAP) that are registered to that FortiGate.

Once the FortiGate is successfully added to FortiAIOps (as shown in the exhibit, statusOnline / Successfully Discovered), all FortiSwitches managed by that FortiGate are:

Discovered automatically through the FortiGate–FortiAIOps connection

Shown under the appropriate inventory / switch views withno separate onboarding stepfor each switch.

This is why no extra IP, serial number, or credential entry is required for FortiSwitch.

So:

AandBsuggest manual per-switch onboarding, which is not how FortiAIOps works with LAN Edge.

Dsimilarly assumes direct FortiSwitch management, but FortiAIOps talks toFortiGate, not the switch.

Therefore the correct behavior is that theFortiSwitch is added automatically (C)once its managing FortiGate is connected to FortiAIOps.