156-590 Exam Dumps - Check Point Certified Threat Prevention Specialist (CTPS)

The correct answer is B. Removes all Administrator overrides . Profile Cleanup is a Threat Prevention profile hygiene tool used mainly in IPS protection management. When administrators manually override protections during tuning, exception handling, false-positive analysis, emergency hardening, or staged deployment, those manual changes can accumulate and cause the profile to deviate from its intended design. Check Point’s IPS Protections documentation states that the Profile Cleanup window lets the administrator select actions such as Remove all user modified and Clear all staging , then install the Threat Prevention Policy.

This directly maps to removing administrator overrides. The option does not automatically set all protections to Detect only; Detect is an action used in specific protection or staging contexts, not the purpose of Profile Cleanup. It also does not delete exemptions, because exception rules are separate policy constructs. It does not repair or remove corrupt updates; IPS update package handling is managed through the update and revert workflow. Profile Cleanup is best understood as a reset mechanism: it clears manual activation or staging deviations so the profile can return to its baseline activation policy and blade settings. Reference topics: IPS Protections, Profile Cleanup, Remove all user modified, Clear all staging, Threat Prevention Policy installation.

The correct answer is B. The executive reports generally contain abstract information without much technical detail. You have to use Smart Event Threat Prevention Report filtered for last week data . For executive communication, the correct SmartEvent mechanism is a report rather than a raw log export or interactive operational view. Check Point documentation explains that views and reports can be exported to PDF or CSV using defined filters and time frames, and that reports summarize network activity and Security Policy enforcement generated by Check Point products such as SmartEvent.

A CEO-level security-incident briefing should emphasize risk, timeline, impact, affected assets, attack category, prevention outcome, and recommended remediation, without requiring the recipient to interpret raw logs or technical blade details. A Threat Prevention Report filtered for last week provides the appropriate time-bounded summary. Option A is overly manual and uses a view plus CSV/PDF conversion rather than the report mechanism. Option C incorrectly shifts the workflow to SmartLog filtering and an external report generator. Option D uses a view, which is better suited for live or interactive operational analysis by administrators, not executive distribution. Reference topics: SmartEvent Reports, Threat Prevention Report, report time filters, executive reporting, exporting reports.

The correct answer is C. Pre-infection . IPS is primarily a pre-infection protection because it is designed to stop exploitation attempts before the target host is compromised. Check Point describes its Threat Prevention solution as a multi-layered defense with both pre-infection and post-infection protections. Within that framework, IPS is the blade that delivers proactive intrusion prevention through signatures, behavioral protections, and preemptive protections, adding protection on top of Firewall enforcement.

This differs from Anti-Bot, which is classically post-infection because it detects infected hosts communicating with command-and-control infrastructure. IPS focuses earlier in the attack chain: reconnaissance, vulnerability exploitation, protocol violations, malicious payload delivery, and attempts to abuse exposed client or server software. It inspects packets and data for risks before successful exploitation results in malware installation, unauthorized access, or control of the system. “Post-inspection” and “pre-inspection” are not the correct lifecycle categories for IPS in Check Point certification terminology. “Post-infection” belongs more naturally to Anti-Bot and compromised-host detection. Reference topics: Threat Prevention Solution, IPS Software Blade, pre-infection defense, proactive intrusion prevention, exploit prevention.

The correct answer is B. Traffic is matched against all applicable layers at the same time . Threat Prevention policy evaluation is not best described as a flat simultaneous match against all applicable layers. Check Point documentation explains that Threat Prevention Policy Layers are Ordered Layers , and that each ordered layer calculates its action separately from the other layers. In a single-layer policy package, the enforced rule is the first matched rule. In multiple-layer policy behavior, matching and enforcement are determined by the layer calculations and the applicable action logic, rather than by one undifferentiated simultaneous match model.

Option A is true because Threat Prevention inspection is applied after the Access Control policy allows the connection; traffic dropped or rejected by Access Control does not proceed to Threat Prevention enforcement. Option C is true for a single Threat Prevention layer because the first matching rule is enforced. Option D is also true because Threat Prevention uses ordered policy-layer behavior. The false statement is therefore option B. Reference topics: Threat Prevention Policy, Ordered Layers, first-match rule behavior, Access Control before Threat Prevention, multi-layer enforcement logic.

The correct answer is D. Only a subset of file types supported . In Check Point traffic inspection architecture, Passive Streaming and Active Streaming are stream-handling mechanisms used by content-inspection components. Passive Streaming allows inspection of traffic as a stream is observed, while Active Streaming is more intrusive because the gateway can actively participate in traffic handling, buffering, or modification. In Anti-Virus inspection, this distinction matters because file classification and supported file handling depend on the inspection mechanism and file-type processing model. Check Point’s Anti-Virus settings expose file-type controls, including processing file-type families and configuring actions per file type. Check Point’s Security Gateway documentation also identifies CPAS as Check Point Active Streaming and PSL as Passive Streaming Layer, with MUX selecting between passive and active streaming for application traffic.

The exam distinction is that Active Streaming does not provide unrestricted Anti-Virus inspection coverage across every possible file type; its limitation is that only a subset of file types is supported. Option A is wrong because Anti-Virus inspection is not limited to scheduled scans. Option B is not the distinct comparative limitation in this context. Option C is incorrect because there is a documented architectural distinction between the two streaming approaches. Reference topics: CPAS, PSL, MUX, Anti-Virus file-type processing, content inspection architecture.

The correct answer is C. Install the Threat Prevention Policy . IPS Core Protections are part of the Threat Prevention policy domain, so changing them in SmartConsole is not enough by itself. The updated configuration must be compiled and installed to the relevant Security Gateways through the Threat Prevention Policy installation process. Check Point’s IPS Protections documentation shows the workflow for editing core protections: go to Security Policies > Threat Prevention > Custom Policy Tools > IPS Protections , filter for Type Core , edit the required core protection settings, and then Install the Threat Prevention policy .

This directly eliminates the other options. The setting is not immediately active because gateways enforce installed policy, not merely edited management configuration. Install Database updates the management database but does not push enforcement logic to the Security Gateway. Install Access Control Policy applies firewall/access-layer logic, but IPS Core Protections belong to the Threat Prevention policy. In operational terms, this separation allows administrators to install Threat Prevention changes without necessarily reinstalling Access Control, reducing disruption and keeping blade changes scoped to the correct policy package. Reference topics: IPS Protections, Core IPS Protections, Custom Policy Tools, Threat Prevention Policy installation, enforcement lifecycle.

The correct answer is D. Verify Threat Prevention Blades are performing properly . Benign testing sites are controlled test resources used to validate that the Threat Prevention path is functioning without exposing the organization to real malware or live malicious infrastructure. Check Point documentation includes examples of test events generated by a Security Gateway, including a path named TestAntiBotBlade.html , which demonstrates that test-oriented resources can be used to confirm Anti-Bot/ThreatCloud detection and logging behavior without relying on an actual infection.

The key purpose is operational validation: confirm that the blade is enabled, the gateway can query or use ThreatCloud intelligence, the correct policy is installed, logs are generated, and the expected prevent/detect behavior occurs. Option A is narrower because rulebase reaction may be one part of testing, but the broader goal is to verify blade operation. Option B is also too narrow because SmartEvent visibility depends on logging and event correlation, while the test’s main purpose is not specifically SmartEvent validation. Option C is incorrect because benign testing sites are not used to decide whether real URLs are malicious; they are intentionally safe test endpoints. Reference topics: Threat Prevention blade validation, Anti-Bot test page, ThreatCloud event testing, logging verification, operational health checks.

The correct answer is D. Inactive . A protection set to Inactive is not enforced for matching traffic, so it does not impose the same inspection and enforcement cost as active protection states. Check Point documentation explains that a Threat Prevention profile determines which protections are activated and which Software Blades are enabled for a rule or policy. The protections a profile activates depend on factors such as performance impact, threat severity, confidence level, and blade-specific settings. Check Point best-practice material also describes that administrators may tune IPS profiles and set protections to prevent , detect , or inactive .

The relative resource logic is direct: Prevent is usually the most expensive because the gateway must inspect and enforce a blocking action inline. Inspect and Detect still require traffic analysis and matching logic, even if the final result is logging rather than prevention. Inactive removes the protection from enforcement consideration, making it the lowest resource option. This does not mean administrators should disable protections indiscriminately; Inactive should be used only when justified by risk, false-positive analysis, performance tuning, or compensating controls. Reference topics: IPS profile tuning, activation settings, performance impact, Prevent/Detect/Inactive behavior, Threat Prevention optimization.