HPE6-A84 practice question 9 of 15

A customer has an AOS 10 architecture, which includes Aruba APs. Admins have recently enabled WIDS at the high level. They also enabled alerts and…

Full set: 59 questions
A customer has an AOS 10 architecture, which includes Aruba APs. Admins have recently enabled WIDS at the high level. They also enabled alerts and email notifications for several events, as shown in the exhibit. Admins are complaining that they are getting so many emails that they have to ignore them, so they are going to turn off all notifications. What is one step you could recommend trying first?
Answer options
A: Send the email notifications directly to a specific folder, and only check the folder once a week.
B: Disable email notifications for Roque AP, but leave the Infrastructure Attack Detected and Client Attack Detected notifications on.
C: Change the WIDS level to custom, and enable only the checks most likely to indicate real threats. Correct answer
D: Disable just the Rogue AP and Client Attack Detected alerts, as they overlap with the Infrastructure Attack Detected alert.
Correct Answer:
C. Change the WIDS level to custom, and enable only the checks most likely to indicate real threats.
Explanation

The core issue is alert fatigue caused by the "high" Wireless Intrusion Detection System (WIDS) level, which is likely too sensitive for the specific network environment and is generating an excessive number of notifications. The most effective initial step is to tune the system. By changing the WIDS level to "custom," administrators can deselect the specific checks that are generating noise or false positives while keeping the protections for high-fidelity, critical threats enabled. This approach directly reduces the volume of irrelevant alerts without compromising the overall security posture, making the notification system manageable and useful again.

Why Incorrect

A: This is a procedural workaround that ignores the root cause. Hiding alerts increases the risk of missing a critical, time-sensitive threat and is poor security practice. B: Disabling an entire category of threats, such as Rogue AP detection, is a drastic measure that creates a significant security gap. The problem is likely sensitivity, not the category itself. D: These alert categories are distinct and detect different types of attacks. They do not inherently overlap, and disabling two of the three would severely weaken the WIDS protection.

References

1. ArubaOS 10.5.x.x User Guide: In the section on configuring Intrusion Detection System (IDS), the guide details the different protection levels. It explains that predefined levels (Low, Medium, High) enable a set of signatures, but the "Custom" level provides granular control. This allows an administrator to enable or disable individual protection types to tailor the IDS to their specific environment, which is the standard procedure for reducing false positives and alert fatigue. (Reference: ArubaOS 10.5.x.x User Guide, Chapter: "Configuring IDS", Section: "IDS Configuration Workflow").

2. Aruba Central Help Center - Configuring IDS: The documentation for configuring IDS within Aruba Central (which manages AOS 10) describes the process of creating and customizing IDS profiles. It explicitly shows how administrators can move from a predefined level to a custom one, where they can check or uncheck specific infrastructure and client attack detections. This functionality is designed precisely for the scenario described: tuning the system to reduce noise. (Reference: Aruba Central Help, Page: "Configuring Intrusion Detection System (IDS)").

Scroll to Top