Microsoft MS-900 Microsoft 365 Fundamentals Exam Dumps and Practice Test Questions Set 3 Q31-45

Visit here for our full Microsoft MS-900 exam dumps and practice test questions.

Question31

A multinational corporation with strict regulatory obligations is consolidating all identity systems across its global regions. The CIO wants every user to authenticate through a unified system, apply consistent conditional access rules, enforce device-based compliance checks, and maintain a single audit trail for all identity events. However, regional offices must retain limited local control for specific regulatory adjustments. Which design best supports this requirement?

A) Implement region-specific identity directories and rely on batch synchronization for global access visibility
B) Deploy one central identity platform with consistent global policies, delegated administration, and integrated access governance
C) Allow each region to select independent identity providers but unify them through custom API connectors
D) Maintain on-premises Active Directory as the only identity source and extend domain trusts to all regional environments

Answer:
B

Explanation:

The requirement is to enforce global uniformity in identity operations while still granting limited regional autonomy. This balance between centralized control and localized flexibility is at the core of modern enterprise identity governance. Option B supports this by providing a single central identity platform capable of enforcing consistent global rules such as conditional access, MFA, device compliance, session monitoring, and risk-based access restrictions. Delegated administration allows regional teams to operate only within their defined scope without violating enterprise control boundaries.

A global corporation needs standardized authentication to reduce security fragmentation, operational misalignment, and inconsistent user experience. A single identity platform ensures that all applications—whether cloud, hybrid, or on-prem—use the same authentication policies. It becomes possible to enforce global requirements like mandatory MFA, risk scoring, continuous evaluation, and adaptive access conditions. Furthermore, centralized governance ensures that all privileged roles, access review processes, and identity lifecycle management flows remain consistent regardless of geography.

The corporation also needs unified auditing, which is impossible when identity systems are siloed. With a central identity platform, every logon attempt, role assignment, privilege escalation, or conditional access decision is recorded in one place. This meets global compliance needs and creates a reliable audit foundation for regulatory reporting, internal investigations, and incident response.

Delegated administration solves the autonomy issue. Regions may adjust specific rules (such as assigning local roles, enabling local break-glass accounts, or applying local compliance restrictions) without disrupting global standards. This allows regional regulatory tailoring while ensuring all changes flow through the central identity governance framework.

Option A causes fragmentation. Region-specific directories synchronized through batch jobs lead to inconsistent signals, delayed visibility, and a high risk of privilege duplication. Batch synchronization can never enforce real-time policy decisions or risk-based authentication.

Option C creates a patchwork authentication system. When each region selects its own identity provider and the enterprise depends on API connectors to unify operations, policy inconsistency becomes inevitable. API-driven integrations often provide partial capability at best. Identity threat detection, uniform access reviews, and conditional access enforcement fail because connectors cannot replicate the intelligence or governance capabilities of a central platform.

Option D, relying solely on on-premises AD with domain trusts, is outdated and fails the requirement for device compliance, cloud integration, conditional access, and unified modern auditing. Domain trusts create large attack surfaces and cannot properly enforce least-privilege boundaries across heterogeneous cloud and SaaS systems.

For these reasons, option B fully aligns with the organization’s architectural, operational, and regulatory needs. It offers the organizational balance of global standardization with local flexibility, which is essential for large multinational enterprises.

Question32

A financial institution handling high-risk monetary transactions wants to eliminate the risk of credential theft among traders and senior financial officers. The security team requires phishing-resistant authentication, password-less workflows, device trust validation, and strong assurance that attackers cannot intercept authentication tokens or manipulate sessions. Which solution best meets these needs?

A) Enforce stronger password complexity rules combined with 30-day mandatory rotation
B) Implement phishing-resistant MFA using hardware security keys and device-bound certificates
C) Deploy email-based one-time passcodes for critical systems
D) Allow VPN access only from corporate IP ranges to limit unauthorized logins

Answer:
B

Explanation:

Financial environments with sensitive transactional authority must adopt authentication mechanisms that eliminate the entire class of phishing-based attacks. Option B provides true phishing-resistant MFA by combining hardware security keys with device-bound certificates that cryptographically validate identity and device integrity. Hardware keys powered by FIDO2/WebAuthn protocols ensure that authentication cannot be intercepted, replayed, or socially engineered because the private key never leaves the device and cannot be extracted by an attacker.

These hardware keys also enforce channel binding, meaning the authentication is tied to the domain the user is logging into. Attackers cannot trick users into authenticating on a malicious site because the hardware key will refuse the transaction. When paired with device-bound certificates, the system ensures that authentication requires both a trusted identity factor and a compliant device. The authentication event will not proceed if the device fails posture checks such as encryption, endpoint protection, or OS integrity requirements.

Password-less workflows further reduce exposure by removing passwords altogether. Passwords remain the weakest link, susceptible to phishing, brute-force, credential stuffing, and shoulder-surfing attacks. Eliminating passwords significantly decreases attacker success pathways.

Option A focuses on password complexity, an approach that does little to stop credential theft. Even strong passwords are vulnerable to modern phishing, token theft, keylogging, browser-injected malware, and session hijacking. Rotating passwords every 30 days increases user frustration without significantly improving security.

Option C relies on email-based OTPs, which attackers can intercept through compromised email accounts, mailbox forwarding rules, or session hijacking. Email is not a secure authentication channel for critical systems in high-value environments like financial operations.

Option D restricts access by IP, but attackers can bypass this by compromising internal systems, using malware to proxy through corporate networks, or spoofing IP ranges. IP filtering is useful but insufficient and does not address phishing or device posture validation.

Only option B satisfies the institution’s requirement for phishing-resistant, device-trusted, cryptographically secure, password-less authentication that protects the most sensitive financial operations.

Question33

A global enterprise plans to implement zero-trust across all systems, from internal applications to cloud workloads. The CISO mandates continuous verification, adaptive policy enforcement, minimal trust boundaries, and strict segmentation between user and workload communications. Which strategy best aligns with zero-trust design principles?

A) Establish an internal corporate network that automatically trusts all traffic inside the perimeter
B) Implement continuous identity, device, and context evaluation to dynamically authorize every resource request
C) Require MFA only at the start of a session and allow unlimited access afterward
D) Use traditional perimeter firewalls and allow unrestricted east-west movement inside the datacenter once authenticated

Answer:
B

Explanation:

Zero-trust security requires continuous verification, where trust is never assumed based on network location or initial authentication. Option B aligns precisely with this model by applying identity checks, device posture evaluations, behavioral signals, and contextual inputs at every access decision point. Every request is authorized dynamically based on policy, device status, user risk level, workload behavior, and environmental factors. This approach dramatically reduces the attack surface and prevents lateral movement because no implicit trust exists between applications, users, or systems.

Zero-trust also demands micro-segmentation, where workloads communicate only with explicitly permitted services. Continuous verification ensures that each communication path is governed by strict policy.

Option A contradicts zero-trust. A trusted internal network is an outdated model that attackers easily exploit by breaching one endpoint and moving laterally. Zero-trust eliminates the concept of a trusted internal zone.

Option C violates continuous validation requirements. A one-time MFA event at session start cannot protect against token theft, session hijacking, cookie replay attacks, or post-authentication compromise.

Option D relies solely on perimeter defense. Once attackers bypass the firewall, they gain near-unrestricted movement within the environment. This violates zero-trust by allowing implicit trust between internal workloads.

Only option B matches the core principles of modern zero-trust architecture.

Question34

A major healthcare network is deploying telemedicine systems, remote patient monitoring, and cloud-hosted EHR platforms. Compliance teams require strict access governance, real-time auditability, least-privilege role assignment, and dynamic policy enforcement based on device health and user context. Which approach best meets these requirements?

A) Allow each clinical department to manage authentication independently based on their workflow preferences
B) Implement centralized identity governance with automated provisioning, conditional access, unified auditing, and consistent least-privilege policies
C) Conduct manual quarterly access reviews using spreadsheets
D) Rely solely on network-based segmentation for all patient-data systems

Answer:
B

Explanation:

Healthcare environments contain some of the most sensitive regulated data—PHI. Compliance frameworks require strict access governance, auditable security controls, and identity-driven enforcement mechanisms. Option B supports this by unifying authentication, enforcing dynamic policies, standardizing identity lifecycle management, and centralizing audit trails across all healthcare systems, both on-premises and cloud-based.

Automated provisioning ensures that clinicians receive only the privileges associated with their job role, reducing excessive access that could lead to privacy violations or regulatory fines. Conditional access enforces that devices and sessions accessing PHI meet security requirements such as encryption, patching, and MFA enforcement.

Unified auditing enables compliance reporting by providing consistent logs for investigators and auditors. Healthcare organizations cannot depend on fragmented logs or departmental autonomy when dealing with regulated data.

Option A results in inconsistent policies and a lack of auditability. Department-level identity management creates risk gaps, inconsistent authentication methods, and difficulty meeting regulatory reporting requirements.

Option C uses spreadsheets, which cannot support real-time access, visibility, or trustworthy audit trails. Manual reviews are error-prone and non-scalable.

Option D, relying solely on network segmentation, ignores identity—now the primary security perimeter. Many healthcare workflows involve remote access, cloud systems, and mobile devices that network segmentation cannot effectively control.

Thus, option B is the only correct approach for compliant healthcare identity governance.

Question35

A global manufacturing organization experiences continual privilege sprawl across its plants and production facilities. Access roles vary widely between regions, provisioning errors are common, and employees often retain access after role changes. Leadership wants enterprise-standard roles, automated access assignments, and localized administrative flexibility without compromising governance. Which strategy should the organization adopt?

A) Let each plant create and manage roles independently and synchronize changes periodically
B) Implement enterprise RBAC with standardized roles, automated lifecycle provisioning, and delegated administration to regional teams
C) Provide broad access rights to reduce operational friction during production cycles
D) Require local administrators to manually assign and remove access permissions per request

Answer:
B

Explanation:

Enterprise RBAC solves privilege sprawl by defining standardized role templates that contain only the required permissions for each job function. Option B also incorporates automated provisioning, which ensures that users receive the correct access at onboarding and lose access immediately when changing roles. Delegated administration enables plant-level operations to perform limited authorized actions without undermining enterprise governance.

Standardized RBAC roles align manufacturing processes, improve auditability, and reduce operational inconsistencies. Automated lifecycle management eliminates manual errors, ensures timely privilege updates, and reduces risk associated with over-privileged accounts.

Option A allows uncontrolled privilege customization, resulting in misaligned roles and security gaps. Synchronization periodicity cannot prevent privilege drift.

Option C violates least-privilege and exposes critical manufacturing systems.

Option D burdens administrators with manual tasks prone to mistakes, delays, and noncompliance.

Question36

A multinational technology company is migrating all its collaboration and productivity workloads to Microsoft 365. The CIO wants to ensure that employees can access shared resources, communicate, and collaborate across offices globally, but at the same time, sensitive intellectual property must be protected through conditional access policies, multi-factor authentication, and monitoring of unusual sign-in behavior. Which Microsoft 365 feature set should the company implement to meet these requirements?

A) Microsoft Teams combined with SharePoint Online and OneDrive for Business, using Microsoft Entra ID Conditional Access for identity and access governance
B) SharePoint Server on-premises with local VPNs and traditional Active Directory security groups
C) Microsoft Planner and Microsoft Stream for all collaboration activities
D) Windows 10 local user accounts with BitLocker and network file shares

Answer:
A

Explanation:

The scenario emphasizes two major priorities: enabling global collaboration while protecting sensitive intellectual property. Microsoft Teams, SharePoint Online, and OneDrive for Business provide the collaborative infrastructure necessary for employees to share files, communicate in persistent chat channels, and co-author documents in real time. Teams acts as the central hub, integrating chat, video, meetings, and application integrations, while SharePoint Online and OneDrive provide secure, cloud-based storage with access control at the document and folder level. By deploying these cloud services, the organization ensures that collaboration is accessible from anywhere, on any device, supporting a distributed global workforce.

Critical to this deployment is identity and access governance. Microsoft Entra ID Conditional Access is designed to enforce policies that dynamically evaluate the risk associated with every sign-in attempt. It considers multiple signals, including user location, device compliance, application sensitivity, and sign-in risk events such as unusual geographic patterns or impossible travel. Conditional Access allows the organization to enforce MFA when risk thresholds are exceeded and block access under unsafe conditions. This ensures that sensitive intellectual property remains protected without imposing unnecessary friction on routine, low-risk activities.

Option B, relying on SharePoint Server on-premises with VPNs and traditional Active Directory, does not scale globally in the same seamless manner as Microsoft 365 cloud services. VPN-based access introduces latency, complexity, and increased administrative overhead. While on-premises AD security groups can control access within local domains, they lack the fine-grained conditional access and risk-based evaluation capabilities provided by Microsoft Entra ID. Additionally, on-premises solutions cannot fully support real-time collaboration for globally distributed teams.

Option C, Microsoft Planner and Microsoft Stream, are specialized applications. Planner provides task management, and Stream provides video streaming and hosting, but neither offers comprehensive collaboration tools for persistent chat, co-authoring, document sharing, and integrated meetings. They are useful supplementary tools, but insufficient to meet the scenario’s enterprise-wide collaboration and IP protection requirements.

Option D, Windows 10 local accounts with BitLocker and network file shares, addresses only device-level encryption and local file access. This approach fails to support cloud-based collaboration, conditional access policies, or identity governance. Employees cannot access resources seamlessly from multiple locations, and there is no mechanism to enforce risk-based authentication or monitor suspicious activity.

Therefore, combining Microsoft Teams, SharePoint Online, OneDrive for Business, and Microsoft Entra ID Conditional Access (Option A) is the most suitable approach for achieving global collaboration while protecting intellectual property. The integration of these services provides cloud-native productivity tools with enterprise-grade security, identity protection, and conditional access enforcement, meeting both operational and compliance requirements for a multinational organization.

Question37

A healthcare provider wants to implement mobile device management for all clinicians using personal devices to access patient records, telemedicine applications, and other healthcare systems. The organization needs to ensure corporate data is protected, that sensitive data cannot be copied to personal applications, and that corporate data can be selectively wiped if a device is lost, without impacting personal data. Which Microsoft 365 capability best supports this requirement?

A) Microsoft Intune App Protection Policies (APP)
B) Microsoft Defender for Endpoint
C) BitLocker Drive Encryption
D) Microsoft Purview Compliance Manager

Answer:
A

Explanation:

The scenario describes a classic Bring Your Own Device (BYOD) environment where clinicians use personal mobile devices to access sensitive healthcare data. The organization requires protection at the application level rather than at the device level alone. Microsoft Intune App Protection Policies (APP) are designed specifically for this scenario. APP allows administrators to define policies that protect corporate data within managed applications, such as Outlook, Teams, Word, Excel, and OneDrive, regardless of whether the device is enrolled in full device management.

Key features include the ability to prevent copy-paste of corporate content to personal applications, enforce encryption on data within apps, require PINs for app access, and enable selective wipe of corporate data without deleting personal content. For healthcare environments where patient data (PHI) is subject to strict privacy and regulatory standards, APP ensures that sensitive information remains within controlled boundaries while still allowing clinicians to use their own devices.

Option B, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, focuses on detecting and mitigating threats on devices, such as malware, ransomware, and suspicious behaviors. While it enhances endpoint security, it does not enforce application-level policies or provide selective corporate data wipe capabilities. It cannot segregate personal from corporate data.

Option C, BitLocker Drive Encryption, protects entire device drives by encrypting data at rest. While effective for lost or stolen devices, it cannot differentiate between corporate and personal data on a BYOD device and does not provide selective wipe functionality. It also does not enforce app-specific controls or prevent data leakage between apps.

Option D, Microsoft Purview Compliance Manager, assists with compliance management and reporting. While it helps the organization assess regulatory adherence, it does not enforce runtime protections on mobile devices or applications. Compliance reporting alone cannot prevent data leakage or secure corporate content on BYOD devices.

Intune APP provides a targeted approach to protect sensitive healthcare data in a BYOD environment. It addresses security, compliance, and operational needs simultaneously by controlling data usage within applications, maintaining separation between corporate and personal content, and supporting selective wipe in case of device loss or employee offboarding. Therefore, Option A is the correct solution.

Question38

A global financial services company wants to implement a zero-trust security model for its enterprise systems. The company requires continuous authentication verification, device posture assessment, contextual access controls, and segmentation between critical financial systems to reduce lateral movement. Which approach best fulfills these zero-trust requirements?

A) Trust all internal network traffic and rely on perimeter firewalls for security
B) Implement continuous evaluation of identity, device, and session context to dynamically authorize each access request
C) Use only strong passwords and periodic access reviews
D) Grant wide access rights after initial MFA verification and trust sessions indefinitely

Answer:
B

Explanation:

Zero-trust security is based on the principle of “never trust, always verify.” It requires continuous evaluation of identity, device health, and contextual information for every access request, rather than relying on network location or previous authentication events. Option B embodies this principle by combining identity verification, device posture checks, and contextual signals to dynamically enforce access policies in real time.

Continuous verification ensures that users and devices maintain compliance with security policies throughout their sessions. For example, if a user’s device becomes noncompliant during a session or suspicious activity is detected, access can be restricted or revoked immediately. This approach also enforces segmentation between critical systems, such as trading platforms, accounting systems, and customer databases, thereby reducing the risk of lateral movement in case of compromise.

Option A, trusting all internal network traffic, is inconsistent with zero-trust principles. Perimeter firewalls provide only initial network access control and do not prevent attacks from compromised internal accounts or devices. Once an attacker bypasses the perimeter, they can freely move laterally.

Option C, relying solely on strong passwords and periodic access reviews, does not provide continuous verification or dynamic access controls. Passwords alone are susceptible to phishing, credential stuffing, and other attacks, and periodic reviews cannot respond in real time to risk events.

Option D, granting broad access after initial MFA, violates zero-trust principles by assuming trust after one authentication event. Session hijacking, token theft, and post-authentication compromise are not mitigated by this approach.

Option B meets zero-trust requirements by continuously verifying identity, enforcing device compliance, evaluating context for every request, and applying segmentation policies. It minimizes attack surfaces and ensures that only authorized and compliant entities can access critical financial systems, aligning with modern security standards for financial enterprises.

Question39

A large manufacturing organization wants to centralize its identity and access management across global plants while maintaining operational flexibility for local administrators. The goal is to standardize roles, automate provisioning and deprovisioning, enforce least-privilege access, and prevent privilege sprawl. Which Microsoft 365 identity strategy should the organization adopt?

A) Allow each plant to create custom roles independently and manually synchronize periodically
B) Deploy enterprise role-based access control (RBAC) with standardized roles, automated provisioning, and delegated administration
C) Provide broad access to all users to reduce operational friction
D) Use local system administrators to manually assign privileges per request

Answer:
B

Explanation:

The scenario describes a common challenge in global organizations where inconsistent access management leads to privilege sprawl, operational inefficiencies, and compliance gaps. Option B, enterprise RBAC with standardized roles, automated provisioning, and delegated administration, directly addresses these challenges.

Standardized RBAC ensures that every employee receives only the permissions required for their role. Automated provisioning and deprovisioning guarantee timely access updates during onboarding, role changes, and offboarding, eliminating manual errors and reducing administrative overhead. Delegated administration allows local plant administrators to manage specific operational tasks without overriding global policies, providing both flexibility and governance.

Option A introduces inconsistencies and delays. Independent role creation and periodic manual synchronization create misalignment, risk of over-permissioned accounts, and a lack of auditability.

Option C violates least-privilege principles. Granting broad access introduces unnecessary risk, potentially exposing critical systems, intellectual property, and operational controls.

Option D relies on manual processes that are inefficient, error-prone, and cannot scale across multiple plants. It also lacks the governance, reporting, and auditing capabilities required for enterprise-level security and compliance.

Enterprise RBAC combined with automation and delegated administration ensures consistent enforcement of global access policies, reduces privilege sprawl, and balances operational flexibility with governance and security requirements. Therefore, Option B is the correct strategy for this organization.

Question40

A global consulting firm wants to ensure that all employees accessing Microsoft 365 services from various devices and locations are authenticated using modern identity protection techniques. The company also wants to enforce adaptive access policies based on risk signals, device compliance, and user behavior. Which Microsoft 365 capability best achieves this objective?

A) Microsoft Entra ID Conditional Access with risk-based policies and device compliance evaluation
B) Traditional Active Directory password policies without cloud integration
C) VPN access to internal systems with static IP restrictions
D) Local device accounts with manual user provisioning

Answer:
A

Explanation:

Modern identity protection requires evaluating every access attempt in real time, considering signals such as sign-in risk, device compliance, location, and user behavior. Microsoft Entra ID Conditional Access provides the necessary capabilities. Policies can enforce MFA based on risk, restrict access to compliant devices, evaluate unusual sign-in patterns, and dynamically adjust access based on organizational security requirements. This enables the firm to maintain strong security while ensuring that employees can securely access Microsoft 365 services from multiple devices and locations.

Option B, traditional Active Directory password policies, cannot dynamically assess risk or enforce conditional access for cloud services. Password-only policies are insufficient to prevent phishing, credential theft, or unauthorized access in a distributed environment.

Option C, VPN access with IP restrictions, only controls network-level access and cannot evaluate device compliance, user behavior, or risk signals. Modern hybrid and cloud work environments render static IP restrictions inadequate for security.

Option D, local device accounts with manual provisioning, cannot enforce dynamic access policies or scale across multiple regions. Manual account management introduces errors and cannot respond to real-time risk indicators.

Option A integrates cloud identity management with adaptive security policies, device compliance checks, and risk-based evaluation, enabling secure, modern access for employees worldwide while protecting organizational assets. It fulfills all the requirements described in the scenario.

Question41

A global retail company is moving all its employee productivity and customer-facing systems to Microsoft 365. The CIO wants to ensure that only authorized users can access sensitive sales, HR, and finance data, that access decisions are adaptive based on risk, and that all administrative changes are auditable across multiple regions. Which Microsoft 365 capability best meets these requirements?

A) Microsoft Entra ID Conditional Access with administrative units, risk-based policies, and auditing enabled
B) Local Active Directory group management with VPN access to internal servers
C) Excel spreadsheets to manually track user permissions and changes
D) Provide all users with global administrator privileges to avoid access issues

Answer:
A

Explanation:

The scenario describes a multinational company that needs strong access control, adaptive security, and centralized audit capabilities across Microsoft 365 workloads. Microsoft Entra ID Conditional Access, combined with administrative units, provides a scalable solution to enforce security policies globally while allowing delegated administration for regional compliance. Conditional Access evaluates each sign-in in real time, factoring in risk signals such as unusual sign-ins, device compliance, and location anomalies, and can enforce MFA or block access dynamically. Administrative units allow regionally scoped administrators to manage users and groups without having global administrative rights, maintaining separation of duties and compliance with local regulations. Auditing logs capture all administrative changes, including role assignments, group membership updates, and policy modifications, which are critical for regulatory compliance and internal governance.

Option B, local Active Directory with VPN access, does not scale efficiently to the cloud. VPNs are not practical for global employee access to SaaS applications, and local AD groups lack the conditional, risk-based evaluation capabilities of cloud-native Conditional Access. This approach also lacks centralized audit trails for cloud activities, making it difficult to demonstrate compliance with regulatory frameworks.

Option C, Excel spreadsheets for tracking permissions, is highly manual, error-prone, and incapable of real-time policy enforcement. There is no automatic enforcement of least-privilege access, no dynamic risk evaluation, and no integration with identity or cloud applications. Spreadsheets cannot scale across thousands of users and multiple regions.

Option D, granting all users global administrator privileges, violates all principles of least privilege, role segregation, and security governance. This would create extreme risk, allowing users to make unrestricted changes, access all sensitive data, and bypass all security policies.

Option A is the only approach that integrates adaptive access controls, regional administration, and comprehensive auditability. It ensures that only authorized personnel access sensitive information, enforces security policies dynamically based on risk signals, and maintains a complete, auditable history of administrative actions across the enterprise.

Question42

A healthcare provider is deploying Microsoft 365 across its hospitals and clinics. Clinicians use a mix of personal and hospital-issued devices to access electronic health records (EHRs), telemedicine platforms, and collaboration tools. The provider wants to prevent accidental or intentional leakage of patient data to personal apps, ensure data encryption, and allow selective wiping of corporate data without affecting personal content. Which solution best addresses these requirements?

A) Microsoft Intune App Protection Policies (APP)
B) Microsoft Defender for Endpoint
C) BitLocker Drive Encryption
D) Local user accounts with manual data management

Answer:
A

Explanation:

The scenario describes a Bring Your Own Device (BYOD) environment common in healthcare, where employees access sensitive patient data on personal devices. Microsoft Intune App Protection Policies (APP) is designed specifically to secure corporate data at the application level. APP enforces policies such as preventing copy-paste from corporate applications to personal apps, encrypting app data, requiring PINs or biometric authentication, and allowing selective wipe of corporate data without impacting personal content. This separation is crucial in healthcare, where patient privacy and regulatory compliance are paramount.

Option B, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, focuses on threat detection and device-level security, such as malware, ransomware, and attack prevention. While it strengthens device security, it does not enforce application-level controls or data segregation between corporate and personal applications. It cannot selectively wipe corporate data.

Option C, BitLocker Drive Encryption, protects the entire device drive by encrypting data at rest. While valuable for lost or stolen devices, BitLocker does not differentiate between corporate and personal data and cannot selectively wipe organizational content. It also does not prevent data leakage between applications.

Option D, local user accounts with manual data management, is highly impractical in a global healthcare environment. Manual controls are error-prone, unscalable, and provide no mechanism to enforce data protection policies or audit usage.

Intune APP provides the right balance of security, compliance, and operational flexibility. It ensures that patient data remains protected while enabling clinicians to use personal devices for work. Its capabilities meet regulatory requirements, including HIPAA, and reduce operational risk without compromising user productivity.

Question43

A multinational bank wants to implement a zero-trust model for its core financial systems. The requirements include continuous authentication, device compliance checks, risk-based adaptive access, and segmentation between sensitive workloads to prevent lateral movement. Which approach best implements these zero-trust principles?

A) Trust all internal network traffic and rely on perimeter firewalls
B) Continuously evaluate identity, device, and session context for every access request
C) Use strong passwords and periodic access reviews only
D) Grant wide access rights after MFA for the initial login and trust sessions indefinitely

Answer:
B

Explanation:

Zero-trust security is founded on the principle that no entity, whether internal or external, should be trusted by default. Option B, continuous evaluation of identity, device, and session context, fulfills this principle by dynamically authorizing every access request based on real-time risk assessment. Each login is evaluated for user identity, device compliance, location, sign-in behavior, and other contextual signals. Adaptive policies enforce MFA, restrict access from non-compliant devices, and segment workloads to minimize lateral movement. Segmentation ensures that even if one system is compromised, attackers cannot move laterally to sensitive banking systems such as trading platforms, accounting databases, or loan processing applications.

Option A, trusting all internal network traffic, is inconsistent with zero-trust principles. Perimeter firewalls only control access at network entry points and do not prevent internal threats or lateral movement from compromised endpoints.

Option C, relying solely on strong passwords and periodic reviews, fails to address continuous risk assessment and dynamic policy enforcement. Passwords alone are susceptible to phishing, credential stuffing, and other attacks. Periodic reviews are too infrequent to mitigate real-time threats.

Option D, granting wide access after initial MFA, violates least-privilege and dynamic verification principles. Once access is granted, there is no mechanism to respond to changes in risk during a session, leaving sensitive workloads exposed.

Option B provides continuous verification, adaptive access policies, device posture assessment, and workload segmentation, fully implementing zero-trust principles. It minimizes attack surfaces and ensures that sensitive financial systems remain protected under all conditions.

Question44

A global manufacturing company experiences inconsistent privilege assignment across plants, leading to over-permissioned accounts and operational risk. The CIO wants standardized roles, automated provisioning and deprovisioning, least-privilege access enforcement, and localized flexibility for plant administrators. Which Microsoft 365 identity solution best achieves this?

A) Allow each plant to manage roles independently and synchronize manually
B) Implement enterprise RBAC with standardized roles, automated provisioning, and delegated administration
C) Grant all employees broad access rights to avoid delays
D) Use local administrators to manually assign privileges for each request

Answer:
B

Explanation:

Enterprise role-based access control (RBAC) is designed to enforce standardized role definitions across an organization. Option B, combining standardized roles with automated provisioning and delegated administration, addresses the scenario perfectly. Standardized roles ensure that employees receive only the permissions necessary for their functions, reducing privilege sprawl and operational risk. Automated provisioning and deprovisioning guarantee that access is timely and accurate, eliminating delays and human error. Delegated administration allows local plant administrators to handle operational tasks without overriding enterprise-level governance policies.

Option A introduces risk by allowing independent role management, which leads to inconsistent access rights and complicated auditing. Manual synchronization cannot guarantee real-time updates and may allow privilege drift.

Option C violates least-privilege principles, creating security and compliance risks by giving employees more access than required. Broad access increases exposure to sensitive manufacturing systems and intellectual property.

Option D is highly manual, error-prone, and unscalable across multiple plants. It also lacks the auditability and consistency required for enterprise governance.

Option B ensures consistent enforcement of access policies, minimizes privilege sprawl, and provides the right balance between global governance and local flexibility. It allows the organization to maintain secure, scalable, and auditable identity management across all plants.

Question45

A multinational consulting firm wants to secure Microsoft 365 access for employees across multiple regions and devices. The firm requires adaptive access controls based on user risk, device compliance, and unusual behavior detection to prevent unauthorized access. Which capability best meets these requirements?

A) Microsoft Entra ID Conditional Access with risk-based policies and device compliance enforcement
B) Traditional Active Directory password policies without cloud integration
C) VPN access with IP restrictions
D) Local accounts with manual provisioning

Answer:
A

Explanation:

The scenario emphasizes global, multi-device, and risk-based access control for Microsoft 365. Microsoft Entra ID Conditional Access provides precisely this capability. Conditional Access evaluates each sign-in attempt based on multiple signals, including user risk, device compliance, geolocation, and anomalous activity. Policies can enforce MFA, block access, or require additional verification when risk thresholds are exceeded. This adaptive approach prevents unauthorized access while allowing legitimate users to access resources efficiently.

Option B, traditional Active Directory password policies, cannot evaluate cloud-based sign-ins, user behavior, or device compliance in real time. It is insufficient for modern distributed workforce requirements.

Option C, VPN with IP restrictions, limits access based on network location but does not account for device health, risk-based policies, or behavior anomalies. VPNs alone cannot protect cloud applications or enforce granular conditional access policies.

Option D, local accounts with manual provisioning, is unscalable, error-prone, and does not provide real-time adaptive security enforcement. It cannot respond dynamically to high-risk sign-ins or anomalous behavior.

Option A integrates cloud identity management, adaptive access policies, device compliance, and risk evaluation. It ensures that only verified and compliant users access Microsoft 365 resources, fulfilling the security and operational requirements for a global consulting firm.

Microsoft Entra ID Conditional Access represents a fundamental shift in identity and access management, particularly for organizations operating in a global and distributed environment. Unlike traditional access controls that rely solely on static factors such as passwords or network location, Conditional Access evaluates multiple signals in real time to determine the risk profile of each access attempt. These signals can include the user’s location, the device’s compliance status, the sensitivity of the requested resource, and patterns of anomalous behavior. By combining these variables, Conditional Access provides adaptive, context-aware security that can respond immediately to emerging threats while minimizing friction for legitimate users. This capability is particularly crucial for a consulting firm with a worldwide workforce, as employees may need to access Microsoft 365 services from diverse locations, devices, and networks.

One of the core advantages of Conditional Access is its ability to enforce risk-based policies. For example, if a sign-in is detected from an unusual geographic location or a device that has not been verified, the system can trigger multi-factor authentication (MFA), block access entirely, or require additional verification steps. This granular control ensures that security measures are proportionate to the level of risk, reducing the likelihood of unauthorized access without unduly burdening users. Additionally, these policies are highly configurable, allowing organizations to define rules specific to roles, departments, or resource sensitivity. Sensitive resources, such as financial or client data, can be protected with stricter access requirements, while lower-risk applications can be accessed with minimal disruption.

Conditional Access also integrates with device compliance frameworks, enabling organizations to ensure that only devices meeting specific security standards can access corporate resources. Devices can be checked for encryption, updated operating systems, antivirus status, and other security configurations before granting access. This approach mitigates the risk of compromised or non-compliant devices being used to access sensitive data. When combined with cloud identity management, Conditional Access can extend these protections to both managed and unmanaged devices, allowing employees to work from personal devices while still maintaining security standards.

VPN access with IP restrictions also falls short because it secures only the network perimeter. VPNs can control where users connect from, but cannot assess device compliance, monitor user behavior, or enforce adaptive risk policies. Modern attacks often originate from legitimate networks or compromised devices, meaning VPNs alone cannot provide comprehensive security. Similarly, relying on local accounts with manual provisioning is not scalable for a global organization. Manual processes introduce delays, errors, and inconsistent enforcement of security policies, making it difficult to ensure that all users comply with access requirements.

Microsoft Entra ID Conditional Access integrates identity management, risk evaluation, and device compliance into a unified framework. It supports real-time decision-making, allowing security teams to implement policies that are both effective and user-friendly. By providing adaptive access controls, Conditional Access reduces the attack surface, prevents data breaches, and supports regulatory compliance. For a consulting firm that requires secure, flexible, and scalable access to Microsoft 365 resources worldwide, Conditional Access is the optimal solution, balancing strong security with operational efficiency and user productivity. This approach enables organizations to protect sensitive information, maintain trust with clients, and support a modern hybrid workforce without compromising security standards.