Our PT-AM-CPE practice materials from our company are invulnerable. And we are consigned as the most responsible company in this area. So many competitors concede our superior position in the market. Besides, we offer some promotional benefits for you. The more times you choose our PT-AM-CPE Training Materials, the more benefits you can get, such as free demos of our PT-AM-CPE exam dumps, three-version options, rights of updates and so on. So customer orientation is the beliefs we honor.
| Certification Vendor: | Ping Identity |
|---|---|
| Exam Name: | Certified Professional - PingAM Exam |
| Exam Number: | PT-AM-CPE |
| Exam Duration: | 120 minutes |
| Related Certifications: | Ping Identity Certified Expert - PingAM |
| Real Exam Qty: | 100 |
| Passing Score: | 66% |
| Available Languages: | English |
| Exam Format: | Scenario-based, Multiple Choice |
| Exam Price: | $395 / £310 / €365 |
| Certificate Validity Period: | 3 years |
| Recommended Training: | PingAM Deep Dive (AM-410) |
| Exam Registration: | Ping Identity Certification Portal |
| Sample Questions: | Ping Identity PT-AM-CPE Sample Questions |
| Exam Way: | Online proctored or onsite testing center |
| Pre Condition: | Completion of PingAM Deep Dive Course (AM-410); 3–6 months hands-on experience with PingAM |
| Official Syllabus URL: | https://backstage.pingidentity.com/university/ping/certification |
>> Reliable PT-AM-CPE Learning Materials <<
In today’s global market, tens of thousands of companies and business people are involved in this line of PT-AM-CPE exam. It is of utmost importance to inquire into the status of exam candidates’ wills to figure out what are the PT-AM-CPE practice materials you really needed. According to your requirements we made our PT-AM-CPE Study Materials for your information, and for our pass rate of the PT-AM-CPE exam questions is high as 98% to 100%, we can claim that you will pass the exam for sure.
| Topic | Details |
|---|---|
| Topic 1 |
|
| Topic 2 |
|
| Topic 3 |
|
| Topic 4 |
|
| Topic 5 |
|
NEW QUESTION # 29
When developing a PingAM may act script for OAuth2 token exchange patterns, which variables are made available for use in the script?
Answer: B
Explanation:
The OAuth2 May Act script type in PingAM 8.0.2 allows administrators to programmatically determine if a token exchange request (impersonation or delegation) should be allowed by adding a may_act claim to the token.
According to the "Scripting" and "Token Exchange Scripting API" documentation, when this script is executed, the AM engine provides a specific set of "Bindings" or variables. These allow the script to inspect the context of the request before deciding to modify the token. The documented variables for the OAuth2 May Act script are:
clientProperties: A map of the OAuth2 client's configuration properties.
identity: The identity object for the user/subject.
logger: The logging object for debugging within the script.
requestProperties: Properties of the incoming HTTP request.
scopes: The set of scopes requested or associated with the token.
scriptName: The name of the script being executed.
session: The user's SSO session (if available).
requestedToken: This is the most important variable; it represents the token being issued. Methods like .addMayAct() or .setMayAct() are called on this specific object.
Why other options are incorrect:
Option B correctly lists the bindings.
Options A and D are incorrect because they use the variable name token. While token is a common variable name in other OAuth2 script types (like the Access Token Modification script), the Token Exchange script specifically uses requestedToken to distinguish the new token from the subject_token or actor_token provided in the request.
Option C uses scopeList, which is not the standard variable name for the scopes in this specific script context; the documentation defines it as scopes.
NEW QUESTION # 30
Examining the following JSON object, what is a valid value for the type part (shown in bold font) of the claim value in a PingAM implementation?
JSON
JSON
"act": {
"sub": "(type!subject)"
}
Answer: C
Explanation:
The JSON object structure provided refers to the Actor (act) claim used in OAuth 2.0 Token Exchange (RFC 8693) within PingAM 8.0.2. This claim is essential for scenarios involving delegation or impersonation, where one entity (the actor) is performing an action on behalf of another (the subject). In PingAM, the sub (subject) field within the act claim follows a specific internal format: (type!subject).
According to the PingAM 8.0.2 documentation regarding Token Exchange Configuration, the type part of this string is a mandatory prefix that identifies the category of the identity acting as the delegate. The documentation explicitly defines two primary valid values for this type field:
usr: This specifies that the subject is a user/identity from an identity store. For instance, if a user is acting on behalf of another user, the claim would appear as "(usr!username)".
age: This specifies that the subject is an OAuth 2.0/OpenID Connect-related agent or client. Examples include an OAuth 2.0 client, a Remote Consent Service agent, or a Web/Java Agent internal client. An example would be "(age!myClientID)".
While "user" and "agent" are the descriptive terms for these categories, the actual technical values recognized and emitted by PingAM in the claim string are the three-letter shorthand codes. Therefore, usr (Option B) is the correct valid value. Choosing "user" (Option D) would be technically incorrect in the context of the exact string format required by the AM engine. This formatting ensures that when the token is introspected or validated, the resource server can correctly parse whether the actor is a human user or a machine client.
NEW QUESTION # 31
In PingAM, which OpenID Connect endpoint can be used to validate an unencrypted ID token?
Answer: B
Explanation:
While OpenID Connect (OIDC) is built on top of OAuth2, it introduces specific endpoints for handling ID Tokens (the identity layer). In PingAM 8.0.2, when a client receives an ID Token, it is recommended to validate it locally using the provider's public keys. However, PingAM also provides a convenience endpoint for validation.
According to the "OpenID Connect 1.0 Endpoints" documentation:
/oauth2/idtokeninfo (Option A): This is the dedicated endpoint designed to receive an ID Token as a parameter.8 It validates the token's signature, checks the expiration and audience, and returns the claims contained within the token in a JSON format. This is specifically used for unencrypted ID tokens.
/oauth2/userinfo (Option B): This endpoint returns claims about the authenticated user but requires a valid Access Token in the authorization header, not an ID Token.9
/oauth2/introspect (Option C): This is a standard OAuth2 endpoint (RFC 7662) used to check the metadata and "activeness" of Access Tokens or Refresh Tokens, not the internal identity claims of an OIDC ID Token.10
/oauth2/tokeninfo (Option D): This is a legacy/non-standard endpoint that was used in older versions for Access Token validation and is not the primary OIDC validation endpoint in version 8.0.2.11 Therefore, for the specific task of validating an ID Token and retrieving its claims, /oauth2/idtokeninfo is the correct and authoritative endpoint in the PingAM 8.0.2 OIDC implementation.
NEW QUESTION # 32
Which of the following statements are correct regarding session upgrades in PingAM?
A) An authenticated user is required to authenticate again either to the same or a different authentication service.
B) The user must not change for the session upgrade to succeed.
C) The only PingAM mechanism to do a session upgrade is the ForceAuth=true request parameter.
D) A session upgrade is PingAM's mechanism to perform what is called step-up authentication.1
Answer: D
Explanation:
In PingAM 8.0.2, Session Upgrade (often referred to as Step-up Authentication) is the process of increasing the "Authentication Level" (Auth Level) associated with a user's session.2 This is common when a user has logged in with a basic method (like username/password) but attempts to access a resource that requires a stronger method (like MFA).
Regarding the statements:
Statement A is correct: To upgrade a session, PingAM requires the user to satisfy the requirements of an authentication tree or module that has a higher Auth Level than the current session.3 This technically involves a "re-authentication" event specifically for the higher-level requirement.
Statement B is correct: Crucially, the identity authenticated during the upgrade must match the identity of the existing session. If a different user attempts to authenticate during an upgrade process, PingAM will reject the upgrade to prevent session hijacking or identity swapping.4 Statement D is correct: Session upgrade is indeed the technical implementation of the industry-standard "step-up authentication" concept.
Statement C is incorrect because ForceAuth=true is not the only mechanism for a session upgrade. While ForceAuth=true (in SAML2 or OIDC) or the prompt=login parameter can force a fresh authentication, PingAM also supports upgrades via Policy Advice.5 When a policy engine determines that a resource requires a higher Auth Level, it sends an "advice" to the client, triggering a session upgrade journey.6 Additionally, authentication trees can be configured to perform upgrades natively using the Session Upgrade configuration in the realm settings. Therefore, since A, B, and D are technically accurate descriptions of the AM 8.0.2 lifecycle, Option C is the correct choice.
NEW QUESTION # 33
What should be configured in PingAM if you are using an LDAP directory service that does not support persistent search?
Answer: D
Explanation:
Persistent Search is an LDAP control that allows a client (like PingAM) to receive real-time notifications from the Directory Server (like PingDS) whenever a user record is modified. PingAM 8.0.2 uses this to maintain its User Data Cache.
According to the "Identity Store Configuration" and "Tuning AM" documentation:
When persistent search is supported, PingAM caches user profile data in memory to speed up authentication and authorization decisions. When a change happens in the LDAP store, the directory server "pushes" the update to AM via the persistent search connection, and AM updates its cache immediately.
If the LDAP directory does not support persistent search (common in some legacy or highly restricted environments):
Cache Inconsistency: If caching were enabled, PingAM would not know when a user's attribute (like a group membership) had changed in the back-end. The cache would become "stale," leading to incorrect authorization decisions.
Required Configuration: The administrator must Disable user data caching to ensure that every request results in a direct query to the LDAP server, ensuring "Read-through" accuracy.
Performance Impact: Disabling the cache has a negative impact on performance (Option D) because every policy evaluation or session check now requires a synchronous network round-trip to the LDAP server, increasing latency and putting higher CPU/IO load on the directory.
Therefore, for directories lacking persistent search, disabling the cache is necessary for data integrity but comes at a significant performance cost.
NEW QUESTION # 34
......
New PT-AM-CPE Exam Objectives: https://www.torrentvce.com/PT-AM-CPE-valid-vce-collection.html