P.S. Free & New PT-AM-CPE dumps are available on Google Drive shared by Exam4Free: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1YXqh2gXZHIACuCjU6VWddABq7YGoKH9P
Are you preparing for the Ping Identity PT-AM-CPE certification exam? Whether you're an experienced professional Ping Identity PT-AM-CPE looking to take your career to the next level or a recent graduate trying to break into the tech field, the road to Ping Identity PT-AM-CPE Certification can be a long and challenging one. The good news is that you do not have to navigate it alone.
| Certification Vendor: | Ping Identity |
|---|---|
| Exam Name: | Ping Identity Certified Professional - PingAM Exam |
| Exam Number: | PT-AM-CPE |
| Related Certifications: | Ping Identity Certified Professional - PingFederate Ping Identity Certified Professional - PingDirectory |
| Available Languages: | English |
| Exam Format: | Multiple choice, Scenario-based questions |
| Sample Questions: | Ping Identity PT-AM-CPE Sample Questions |
| Exam Way: | Proctored online or authorized testing center (varies by region and delivery provider) |
| Pre Condition: | Recommended prior experience with identity and access management concepts and Ping Identity products. No strict mandatory prerequisites published. |
>> New Ping Identity PT-AM-CPE Braindumps Ebook <<
Our PT-AM-CPE exam prep is elaborately compiled and highly efficiently, it will cost you less time and energy, because we shouldn't waste our money on some unless things. The passing rate and the hit rate are also very high, there are thousands of candidates choose to trust our PT-AM-CPE guide torrent and they have passed the exam. We provide with candidate so many guarantees that they can purchase our PT-AM-CPE Study Materials no worries. So we hope you can have a good understanding of the PT-AM-CPE exam torrent we provide, then you can pass you PT-AM-CPE exam in your first attempt.
| Topic | Details |
|---|---|
| Topic 1 |
|
| Topic 2 |
|
| Topic 3 |
|
| Topic 4 |
|
| Topic 5 |
|
NEW QUESTION # 35
Which is the correct simplified TLS handshake sequence needed to authenticate clients using a mutual TLS exchange?
Answer: C
Explanation:
Mutual TLS (mTLS) is a security enhancement where both the client and the server provide X.509 certificates to prove their identities.9 In PingAM 8.0.2, mTLS is frequently used for secure "Machine-to-Machine" (M2M) communication, such as between an OAuth2 client and the token endpoint, or between AM and a Directory Server (PingDS).
According to the PingAM documentation on "Secure Network Communication" and "mTLS for OAuth2," the handshake sequence for mTLS follows these logical steps:
Client Hello: The client initiates the request to the server.10
Server Hello & Certificate: The server responds by presenting its own certificate (verifying the server's identity to the client).11 In an mTLS scenario, the server also includes a CertificateRequest message.12 Client Certificate & Key Exchange: The client validates the server's certificate. If valid, the client then sends its own Client Certificate to the server, along with the encrypted pre-master secret or key exchange data.
Verification and Establishment: The server validates the client's certificate against its truststore. If the certificate is trusted and the cryptographic signatures match, the mutually secure connection is established.
Option D represents the most accurate "simplified" sequence. Option A is incorrect because the server presents its certificate before the client sends its own certificate. Option B and C are incorrect because the server always responds to the initial "Client Hello" with its own identity (Server Certificate) before the client proceeds with identity submission. This "handshake" ensures that no data is transmitted until both parties have cryptographically verified each other.
NEW QUESTION # 36
To ensure the user's full name is displayed on the consent screen for an OpenID Connect application, which string should be added into the Support Claims property on the OpenID Connect tab page of the OAuth2 Provider service in PingAM?
Answer: D
Explanation:
When a client requests an OpenID Connect (OIDC) scope (like profile), PingAM 8.0.2 may present a Consent Screen to the user, asking permission to share specific claims. To make this screen user-friendly, PingAM allows administrators to map technical claim names to human-readable labels and specify localizations.
According to the PingAM documentation on "Supported Claims" in the OAuth2/OIDC Provider settings:
The format for the Supported Claims property entry is:
ClaimName|Locale|DisplayName
In this syntax:
ClaimName: The technical OIDC claim (e.g., name, email, given_name).
Locale: The ISO language code (e.g., en, fr).
DisplayName: The text that will actually appear on the UI (the "Full name" label).
Therefore, the string name|en|Full name (Option A) is the correct configuration.
Option B is incorrect because it reverses the technical name and the display name.
Option C is incorrect as it lacks the required locale component and uses full_name (which is not the standard OIDC claim name; the standard is name).
Option D attempts to perform a logic operation (+) within a configuration field where only static mapping strings are allowed. Claim composition (concatenating first and last names) is handled by the OIDC Claims Script, not by the Supported Claims UI property.
NEW QUESTION # 37
When making a request to the /oauth2/access_token endpoint using the JWT profile client authentication method, which parameter is used to provide the JWT value?
Answer: A
Explanation:
PingAM 8.0.2 supports advanced client authentication methods defined in the OpenID Connect and OAuth 2.0 specifications, including private_key_jwt and client_secret_jwt. These methods allow a client to authenticate without sending a static password/secret in the request. Instead, the client generates and signs a JSON Web Token (JWT).
According to the "OAuth 2.0 Client Authentication" and "JWT Profile for Client Authentication" (RFC 7523) documentation, when a client sends this JWT to the /oauth2/access_token endpoint, it must use the client_assertion parameter.
The request must also include the client_assertion_type parameter, which must be set to the constant value: urn:ietf:params:oauth:client-assertion-type:jwt-bearer.
Option A (client_credentials) is a grant type, not a parameter for providing a JWT.
Option B (client_token_value) is not a standard OAuth2 parameter name.
Option C (client_id) is often included in the request, but it is the identifier of the client, not the container for the cryptographic assertion itself.
When PingAM receives a request with a client_assertion, it extracts the JWT, verifies the signature using the client's public key (stored in the client's profile or retrieved via a JWKS URI), and validates the standard claims (iss, sub, aud, exp). This method is significantly more secure than simple secrets because it proves the client possesses the private key and limits the window for replay attacks through the token's expiration claim.
NEW QUESTION # 38
Which OAuth2 flow is most appropriate to support the use case of a client application implemented in a browser using a scripted language such as JavaScript?
Answer: C
Explanation:
In PingAM 8.0.2, the recommended and most secure flow for "Public Clients"-such as Single Page Applications (SPAs) written in JavaScript-is the Authorization Code Grant Flow with PKCE (Proof Key for Code Exchange).
Historically, the Implicit Grant Flow (Option B) was used for browser-based apps because they could not securely store a client_secret. However, the Implicit flow is now considered legacy and insecure due to the risk of access token leakage in the browser history or via referrer headers. The Resource Owner Password Credentials Grant (Option C) is also discouraged as it requires the application to handle user credentials directly, violating the core principle of delegated authorization. Client Credentials (Option D) is reserved strictly for machine-to-machine communication where no user is involved.
The Authorization Code Grant with PKCE addresses the security limitations of public clients by replacing the static client_secret with a dynamically generated "code verifier" and "code challenge." The process works as follows:
Challenge Generation: The JavaScript app creates a cryptographically strong random string (Verifier) and transforms it (Challenge).
Authorization Request: The app sends the challenge to PingAM.21
Code Exchange: After user login, AM returns an authorization code. The app then sends the code and the original verifier to the token endpoint.
Verification: AM verifies that the verifier matches the initial challenge before issuing the Access Token.
This flow ensures that even if an attacker intercepts the authorization code, they cannot exchange it for a token without the original verifier, which never left the browser's execution context. PingAM 8.0.2 fully supports this flow and provides specific configuration options in the OAuth2 Provider settings to enforce PKCE for all public clients.
NEW QUESTION # 39
Examine the following JWT client assertion in JSON format. From the subset of claims listed below, which claim can be optional?
JSON
JSON
{
"iss": "myClient",
"sub": "myClient",
"aud": "https://am.example.com/login/oauth2/access_token",
"jti": "id012345",
"exp": 1633363568,
"iat": 1633356368
}
Answer: B
Explanation:
When an OAuth2 client uses Private Key JWT or Client Secret JWT for authentication at the PingAM 8.0.2 token endpoint, it must present a JWT (JSON Web Token) containing specific claims that identify and authorize the client. This is governed by the OIDC and OAuth2 JWT Profile specifications (RFC 7523).
According to the PingAM documentation on "OAuth 2.0 Client Authentication" and the "JWT Profile for Client Authentication":
iss (Issuer): Mandatory. This must be the client_id of the OAuth2 client.
sub (Subject): Mandatory. This must also be the client_id of the OAuth2 client (as the client is the subject of the authentication).
aud (Audience): Mandatory. This must be the URL of the PingAM OAuth2 service (the token endpoint) or the issuer URL.
exp (Expiration Time): Mandatory. This protects against the long-term use of intercepted assertions.
The jti (JWT ID) (Option A) provides a unique identifier for the token. In the context of standard JWT validation, jti is used to prevent replay attacks by ensuring that a specific token is only processed once. While highly recommended for security hardening, the PingAM 8.0.2 technical reference for OAuth2 client assertions marks jti as optional unless the server is explicitly configured to require it for replay detection. Without a jti, PingAM will still validate the iss, sub, aud, and exp claims to authenticate the client. Therefore, among the choices provided, jti is the claim that can be omitted without inherently violating the base OAuth2 JWT authentication request requirements.
NEW QUESTION # 40
......
PT-AM-CPE Instant Download: https://www.exam4free.com/PT-AM-CPE-valid-dumps.html
What's more, part of that Exam4Free PT-AM-CPE dumps now are free: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1YXqh2gXZHIACuCjU6VWddABq7YGoKH9P