Fortinet Fortinet NSE 4 - FortiOS 7.6 Administrator NSE4_FGT_AD-7.6 Exam Dumps: Updated Questions & Answers (January 2026)

From the exhibits, there are three relevant firewall policies from LAN (port4) to WAN (port2), each using a different IP pool for source NAT:

TCP traffic

Service: ALL_TCP

Destination: BR1-FGT

IP Pool: SNAT-Pool → 100.65.0.49

PING traffic

Service: PING

Destination: all

IP Pool: SNAT-Remote1 → 100.65.0.99

IGMP traffic

Service: IGMP

Destination: all

IP Pool: SNAT-Remote → 100.65.0.149

The user on HQ-PC-1 (10.0.11.50) is pinging BR1-FGT (100.65.1.111). In FortiOS, policy matching is based on (among other fields) source, destination, and service, and the first matching policy in top-down order is applied.

Because the traffic is ICMP echo (ping), it matches the policy named PING traffic (service PING, destination all). That policy explicitly uses Use Dynamic IP Pool with SNAT-Remote1, which is configured with external IP 100.65.0.99.

Therefore, the source NAT IP used for this ping is 100.65.0.99.

The exhibit shows the output of the following command:

diagnose test application ipsmonitor 1

pid = 2044, engine count = 0 (+1)

0 - pid:2074:2074 cfg:1 master:0 run:1

How to interpret this output (FortiOS 7.6 – IPS internals)

ipsmonitor displays the status of IPS engines running on the FortiGate.

engine count = 0 means:

No IPS scanning engines are currently active

IPS is not processing any traffic

In FortiOS, IPS engines are started on demand.

Critical documented behavior

IPS processes are only spawned when at least one firewall policy is configured with an IPS profile and traffic matches that policy.

If no firewall policy references an IPS profile, the IPS engine:

Does not start

Shows engine count = 0

Appears “not working,” even though the IPS profile exists

This is exactly what the diagnose output indicates.

Why option A is correct

A. There is no firewall policy configured with an IPS security profile.

Creating an IPS profile alone is not sufficient

IPS must be applied to an active firewall policy

Traffic must match that policy for the IPS engine to run

Otherwise, ipsmonitor will show engine count = 0

This matches FortiOS 7.6 IPS operational behavior.

Why the other options are incorrect

B. Administrator entered the command diagnose test application ipsmonitor 5.

Incorrect.

The exhibit clearly shows ipsmonitor 1

Using a different argument would not explain engine count = 0

C. FortiGate entered into IPS fail open state.

Incorrect.

In fail-open, IPS engines may be bypassed, but they still initialize

engine count = 0 specifically indicates IPS is not in use at all

D. Administrator entered the command diagnose test application ipsmonitor 99.

Incorrect.

The command argument affects debug level, not engine creation

Again, the exhibit shows ipsmonitor 1

In FortiOS 7.6, when FortiGate is integrated with FortiAnalyzer and FortiManager, firewall policies rely on a Universally Unique Identifier (UUID) to ensure proper policy tracking, synchronization, and log correlation across devices.

Why the UUID is required

Every firewall policy in FortiOS has a UUID.

FortiManager uses the UUID to:

Track policies across managed FortiGate devices

Maintain policy consistency during installs and revisions

FortiAnalyzer uses the UUID to:

Correlate logs accurately to the correct firewall policy

Preserve log association even if policy order or policy ID changes

Without a UUID:

Policy-to-log mapping can break

FortiManager cannot reliably manage or synchronize policies

FortiAnalyzer log analysis becomes inconsistent

This is explicitly documented in Fortinet administration and logging architecture references.

Why the other options are incorrect

B. Policy IDPolicy ID can change when policies are moved and is not reliable for long-term correlation across FortiManager and FortiAnalyzer.

C. Sequence IDSequence ID reflects GUI ordering only and has no role in log correlation.

D. Log IDLog ID is generated per log event, not per firewall policy.

In FortiOS 7.6, the Antivirus scan master switch in an antivirus profile becomes available only after at least one supported protocol is enabled for inspection.

What the exhibit shows

A new antivirus profile named FTP_AV_Profile

Feature set: Flow-based

Antivirus scan switch is grayed out

All Inspected Protocols (HTTP, SMTP, POP3, IMAP, FTP, CIFS) are currently disabled

Why the Antivirus scan switch is grayed out

In FortiOS antivirus profiles:

The Antivirus scan toggle is a dependent control

It cannot be enabled unless at least one inspected protocol is selected

This prevents enabling AV scanning when there is no traffic type to scan

This behavior is documented in the FortiOS 7.6 Antivirus Profile configuration section.

Once you enable a protocol (for example, FTP), the Antivirus scan switch becomes active and configurable.

Why option B is correct

B. None of the inspected protocols are active in this profile.

All protocol toggles are OFF

Therefore, FortiGate disables (grays out) the Antivirus scan option

This is expected and correct behavior

Why the other options are incorrect

A. Antivirus scan is disabled under Feature visibilityIncorrect. Feature Visibility controls whether Antivirus appears in the GUI, not whether the scan switch is enabled inside a profile.

C. Feature set must be Proxy-basedIncorrect. Antivirus scanning is supported in both flow-based and proxy-based modes.

D. Less than 2 GB RAM does not support Antivirus scanIncorrect. Memory size affects performance and offloading, not basic AV scan availability.

NetAPI: Polls temporary sessions created on the DC when a user logs on or logs off and calls the NetSessionEnum function on Windows. It’s faster than the WinSec and WMI methods; however, it can miss some logon events if a DC is under heavy system load. This is because sessions can be quickly created and purged form RAM, before the agent has a chance to poll and notify FG.

Based on the FortiOS 7.6 Administrator Guide regarding Fortinet Single Sign-On (FSSO) polling modes, the agentless polling mode has specific technical characteristics:

SMB Protocol Usage (Statement B is True):

In agentless polling mode, the FortiGate unit itself acts as the collector.

It establishes direct connections to the Windows Domain Controllers (DCs) using the SMB (Server Message Block) protocol, typically over TCP port 445, to read the Windows Security Event logs.

This allows FortiGate to parse login event IDs (such as 4768 and 4769) to identify users and their corresponding IP addresses without needing an external collector agent installed on a server.

Workstation Check Support (Statement C is True):

One of the primary limitations of the agentless polling mode compared to the agent-based mode is the lack of workstation verification.

In agentless mode, FortiGate does not perform "workstation checks" or "dead entry checks". This means it cannot proactively verify if a user is still logged into a specific workstation after the initial logon event is recorded, which can lead to stale entries if a user logs off without a corresponding event being captured.

Why other options are incorrect:

Option A: In agentless mode, FortiGate (the FSSO daemon) performs the collection itself; it does not use the AD server as a "collector agent" in the functional sense of FSSO architecture.

Option D: While FortiGate uses LDAP to retrieve group membership information once a user is identified, it does not "direct" a collector agent to a remote LDAP server, as there is no external collector agent involved in this specific mode.

Phase 1 being up confirms the two FortiGate devices can authenticate and build the IKE SA. Phase 2 failing indicates the IPsec (Quick Mode) SA negotiation is failing due to mismatched Phase 2 parameters.

From the exhibit, the Phase 2 mismatches that would prevent SA establishment are:

1) Phase 2 selectors must mirror each other (Proxy IDs)

HQ-NGFW Phase 2 selector shows:

Local: 10.0.11.0/24

Remote: 172.20.1.0/24

BR1-FGT Phase 2 selector shows:

Local: 172.20.1.0/24

Remote: 10.11.0.0/24 ⟵ does not match HQ’s local subnet (10.0.11.0/24)

In FortiOS, Phase 2 comes up only when the peers’ selectors (proxy IDs) match as opposite pairs (local on one side = remote on the other).

✅ Fix: A. On BR1-FGT, set Remote Address to 10.0.11.0/255.255.255.0.

2) Phase 2 proposal must match (encryption/authentication)

HQ-NGFW shows encryption AES128 (with SHA1)

BR1-FGT shows encryption AES256 (with SHA1)

For Phase 2 to establish, both peers must have at least one common proposal (same encryption and authentication settings). With one side set to AES128 and the other to AES256, there is no match.

✅ Fix: D. On HQ-NGFW, set Encryption to AES256.

Why the other options are not correct

B. Enable Diffie-Hellman Group 2: The exhibit’s mismatch is not resolved by adding DH group 2, and DH group must match when PFS is enabled. This option does not align the peers based on what’s shown.

C. Set Seconds to 43200: Phase 2 lifetime mismatches typically do not prevent Phase 2 from coming up (the negotiated lifetime can be adjusted by the peers). The hard blockers here are the selectors and proposal mismatch.

From the exhibits:

The firewall policy has Application Control enabled and uses certificate-inspection for SSL inspection.

The application sensor has Application and Filter Overrides with the following order (priority):

Excessive-Bandwidth with action Block

Google (vendor filter) with action Monitor

In FortiOS, Application and Filter Overrides are evaluated by priority (top-down). The first matching override is applied. If traffic matches an earlier override with Block, it will be blocked even if a later override would Monitor/Allow it.

Why Google apps fail while www.fortinet.com works:

Many Google applications can be detected as (or can trigger) the Excessive-Bandwidth behavior/signature depending on the specific service and traffic pattern.

Because Excessive-Bandwidth (Block) is above Google (Monitor), Google-related traffic may match the first rule and be blocked before the Google override is evaluated.

Access to www.fortinet.com works because that traffic is not matching the Excessive-Bandwidth override.

Therefore, to resolve:

B. Move up Google in the Application and Filter Overrides section to set its priority higher

This ensures Google matches the Google override before any broader blocking override is applied.

E. Set the action for Google in the Application and Filter Overrides section to Allow

This explicitly permits Google applications once the higher-priority match occurs (stronger than Monitor for troubleshooting and ensuring access).

Why the other options are not the best fit here:

A (deep-content inspection) can help identify more HTTPS applications, but the exhibit already shows a specific Google override configured; the immediate issue is the override evaluation order and action.

C relates to Web Filter URL categories, but the problem is occurring under Application Control behavior/vendor overrides.

D (flow-based) is not required to fix an override priority/action conflict.