CheckPoint 156-590 Practice Exam Questions & Answers

The correct current official-guide answer is A. Every two hours. Starting from R80.20, Check Point changed IPS update behavior so that gateways can directly download Threat Prevention updates instead of relying only on the Security Management Server and policy installation workflow. The official R80.20 SmartConsole Help states that, starting from R80.20, gateways can directly download updates, while gateways without Internet connectivity still require policy installation to enforce updates. The same official section states that IPS, Anti-Virus and Anti-Bot updates are performed every two hours by default.

This is the key distinction for R80.20 and later. Earlier operational models were more management-server centered, but R80.20+ supports gateway-side automatic update behavior. Every 24 hours is not the current documented default for IPS, Anti-Virus, and Anti-Bot updates in this R80.20+ context. Threat Emulation engine and image updates have separate daily default schedules, which can create confusion if update types are mixed together. Option C and D are also incorrect because the official default is neither hourly nor every four hours. Reference topics: Threat Prevention Scheduled Updates, R80.20 gateway direct updates, IPS update frequency, Anti-Virus and Anti-Bot updates, policy installation for offline gateways.

The correct answer is D. Log. In Check Point Threat Prevention, tracking determines what evidence is generated when a rule or protection matches traffic. The official Logging and Monitoring guide states that Log is the default option in the Threat Prevention policy, and that it shows the information the Security Gateway used to match the connection, including at minimum source, destination, source port, and destination port. It also explains that richer session details can appear when the rule includes application or data-type matching.

For IPS protections, this default is operationally important because IPS enforcement without logs would make post-event investigation, false-positive analysis, tuning, and compliance validation much harder. None is specifically documented as the default in Access Control policy, not Threat Prevention. Alert is a stronger notification mechanism but is not the default tracking behavior. UserCheck is an end-user interaction mechanism used in selected blades and scenarios, not the default IPS protection tracking value. The default Log setting gives administrators visibility into IPS matches while avoiding the operational noise of alerting on every event. Reference topics: Threat Prevention Track options, IPS logging, Logs & Monitor, protection match evidence, default Threat Prevention tracking.

The correct answer is B. Pre-infection. IPS is categorized as a pre-infection Threat Prevention blade because its primary role is to stop exploitation attempts before the protected host becomes compromised. Check Point's Threat Prevention guide describes IPS as protection against malicious and unwanted network traffic, focusing on application and server vulnerabilities, in-the-wild attacks, exploit kits, and malicious attackers. The same guide distinguishes Anti-Bot & Advanced DNS as post-infection detection of bots on hosts, while Anti-Virus is described as pre-infection detection and blocking of malware at the gateway.

IPS belongs in the pre-infection stage because it prevents the exploit chain from succeeding. It inspects network traffic for vulnerability exploitation, protocol abuse, malformed payloads, known CVE exploitation attempts, server attacks, client attacks, and suspicious patterns that could lead to compromise. ''Preventative'' is broadly true as an English description, but it is not the specific Check Point lifecycle classification tested here. ''Inline'' describes where a security function may sit in traffic flow, not the infection-stage category. ''Post-infection'' is associated with Anti-Bot, which detects and blocks command-and-control communications after a host shows signs of compromise. Reference topics: IPS Software Blade, pre-infection prevention, exploit protection, Threat Prevention architecture, Anti-Bot post-infection contrast.

The correct answer is D. The rule is contained on a single line. There are two logical sections: Rule Header and Rule Options. SNORT signatures are supported in Check Point Threat Prevention as custom IPS-style protections, and their structure follows the standard SNORT rule model. Official Snort documentation states that the rule header includes the text before the first parenthesis, while the body contains the rule options between parentheses. It also shows a complete rule with header and option definitions. The classic Snort rule reference describes the two logical sections as the rule header and rule options.

In the exam wording, the expected construction is a single-line rule composed of these two logical sections. The header defines the coarse traffic selector and action, such as alert/drop, protocol, source, destination, ports, and direction. The options define the detailed detection logic, such as message, content match, flow, metadata, and signature identifier. ''Payload'' is not the correct formal name for the second logical section, which eliminates options A and C. Option B uses the correct logical sections but incorrectly states that the rule is contained on two lines. Reference topics: SNORT Signature Support, custom IPS protections, Rule Header, Rule Options, signature syntax.

The correct answer is D. Ordered. Threat Prevention policy uses ordered policy layers. Check Point documentation states that you can create a Threat Prevention Rule Base with multiple Ordered Layers, and that Ordered Layers help organize the Rule Base according to organizational needs, such as services or networks. Each Policy Layer calculates its action separately from other layers, and when there is one layer in the policy package, the first matched rule is enforced.

This is a core certification distinction. Access Control can use ordered and inline layers, but Threat Prevention is treated as an ordered layer policy model. The policy evaluates rules in order and applies the appropriate Threat Prevention profile, blades, protection behavior, and tracking according to rule matching. Option C describes when Threat Prevention is applied in the traffic flow---after Access Control accepts the connection---but it does not answer the question about the layer type. Option A is incorrect because Threat Prevention is not both ordered and inline in this context. Option B is incorrect because inline layers are not the Threat Prevention layer type being tested here. Reference topics: Threat Prevention Policy Layers, Ordered Layers, first-match behavior, policy-layer calculation, Threat Prevention Rule Base.

The correct answer is B. Intrusion Prevention System. In Check Point terminology, IPS is the Software Blade responsible for inspecting and analyzing packets and data for numerous risk types. The official Check Point Threat Prevention documentation identifies IPS as Intrusion Prevention System and describes IPS protections as part of the Threat Prevention Software Blade framework.

IPS is more than a simple signature engine. It provides vulnerability-oriented and exploit-oriented protections, including protections mapped to CVEs, protocol anomalies, command injection patterns, server-side attacks, client-side attacks, and other known or unknown exploitation behaviors. Check Point also describes IPS as delivering proactive intrusion prevention with thousands of signatures, behavioral protections, and preemptive protections, adding another layer of security above firewall enforcement.

The incorrect options misuse the term ''Invasion'' or replace ''System'' with ''Software.'' Although IPS is implemented as a Check Point Software Blade, the acronym itself expands to Intrusion Prevention System. In policy design, IPS is treated as a pre-infection prevention capability that stops exploitation before compromise, rather than as a post-infection malware-detection control. Reference topics: IPS Software Blade, Intrusion Prevention System definition, IPS protections, CVE-based protections, proactive intrusion prevention.

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.