Microsoft SC-100 Cybersecurity Architect Exam Dumps and Practice Test Questions Set 4 Q46-60

Visit here for our full Microsoft SC-100 exam dumps and practice test questions.

Question46:

A multinational enterprise wants to enforce adaptive access policies across all cloud applications to mitigate compromised accounts and detect risky sign-ins. Which solution provides the most effective protection?

A) Microsoft Entra ID Conditional Access with Identity Protection and device compliance
B) Traditional Active Directory password expiration policies
C) VPN access restricted to corporate IP ranges
D) Local accounts with complex passwords and manual provisioning

Answer:
A

Explanation:

Option A, Microsoft Entra ID Conditional Access with Identity Protection and device compliance, is the most effective solution for adaptive access and continuous risk management. Conditional Access evaluates every sign-in attempt based on multiple signals, including user identity, device compliance, location, and behavioral patterns. Identity Protection continuously monitors for suspicious activity, compromised accounts, and high-risk sign-ins. Device compliance ensures that only secure, managed endpoints can access sensitive cloud applications. This cloud-native, integrated solution allows organizations to enforce risk-based policies, dynamically requiring multi-factor authentication, blocking access, or prompting for password resets when high-risk activity is detected. It aligns with zero-trust principles, ensuring no user or device is implicitly trusted. By centralizing control and monitoring, enterprises can scale security across hybrid and multi-cloud environments while maintaining operational efficiency for legitimate users. Reporting and audit capabilities provide visibility into user access patterns and help demonstrate compliance with regulatory frameworks. Adaptive enforcement automates responses to threats, reduces administrative overhead, and strengthens the enterprise’s overall security posture. This solution is essential for global organizations facing sophisticated cyber threats, providing real-time protection and continuous assessment of risk for all users and devices.

Option B, traditional Active Directory password expiration policies, is static and reactive. Periodic password changes do not assess risk or adapt to suspicious activity. Password-only authentication is vulnerable to phishing and credential theft. This approach does not provide centralized auditing, monitoring, or adaptive enforcement and is insufficient for modern cloud environments.

Option C, VPN access restricted to corporate IP ranges, only provides network-level control. It cannot evaluate user identity, device compliance, or behavioral risk. Threat actors with compromised credentials can still access resources from allowed IP ranges. VPN solutions lack integration with cloud applications, centralized monitoring, and adaptive enforcement, limiting their effectiveness for zero-trust security.

Option D, local accounts with complex passwords and manual provisioning, is highly insecure and operationally inefficient. Manual account management is error-prone and does not scale. Complex passwords alone cannot prevent unauthorized access, and local accounts cannot enforce risk-based or adaptive policies. This approach does not meet the requirements for modern enterprise security or zero-trust principles.

Question47:

A healthcare organization wants clinicians to access cloud-based patient data remotely while maintaining HIPAA compliance. Which solution provides the most effective security?

A) Microsoft Entra ID Conditional Access with device compliance and risk-based policies
B) Traditional Active Directory password policies without MFA
C) VPN access limited to corporate IP ranges
D) Local accounts with complex passwords and no monitoring

Answer:
A

Explanation:

Option A, Microsoft Entra ID Conditional Access with device compliance and risk-based policies, provides the most effective solution for secure remote access in healthcare organizations. Conditional Access evaluates sign-ins in real time based on user identity, device compliance, geolocation, and detected risk signals. Adaptive enforcement ensures that high-risk sign-ins trigger multi-factor authentication, access blocking, or password resets. Device compliance ensures that only secure, managed endpoints can access sensitive healthcare information, including electronic health records. Risk-based policies minimize the likelihood of unauthorized access by continuously adapting to emerging threats, such as compromised accounts or unusual login activity. This solution supports HIPAA compliance by providing detailed audit logs, reporting, and monitoring, enabling organizations to demonstrate adherence to regulatory requirements. Clinicians can securely access cloud applications remotely, supporting telehealth services and hybrid workflows without compromising patient data. Adaptive controls reduce friction for legitimate users while preventing high-risk access, aligning with zero-trust principles and maintaining operational efficiency.

Option B, traditional Active Directory password policies without MFA, is insufficient. Password-only authentication cannot prevent phishing, credential theft, or account compromise. Static policies do not evaluate risk signals or provide adaptive responses, leaving sensitive patient data exposed and non-compliant with HIPAA.

Option C, VPN access limited to corporate IP ranges, provides network-level security but cannot assess device compliance or user behavior. Compromised credentials could still grant access within allowed networks, and VPN-only solutions do not integrate with cloud applications or provide auditing for compliance purposes.

Option D, local accounts with complex passwords and no monitoring, is highly insecure. Local accounts cannot enforce adaptive policies, monitor activity, or provide centralized auditing. Even strong passwords do not prevent unauthorized access, making this solution unsuitable for healthcare organizations.

Question48:

A global enterprise wants to enforce least-privilege access and regularly review user permissions across cloud applications. Which solution provides the most scalable and compliant approach?

A) Microsoft Entra ID entitlement management with access reviews
B) Manual spreadsheets tracking user permissions
C) VPN access control lists updated quarterly
D) Local accounts with ad hoc permission audits

Answer:
A

Explanation:

Option A, Microsoft Entra ID entitlement management with access reviews, is the most scalable and compliant solution for least-privilege enforcement. Entitlement management enables administrators to create access packages tied to specific roles and resources, with automated assignment, approval workflows, and dynamic provisioning. Access reviews periodically validate that users retain only the permissions necessary for their roles, removing outdated or unnecessary access. Automation reduces administrative burden, prevents orphaned accounts, and mitigates the risk of over-privileged users. Integration with cloud applications provides centralized monitoring, auditing, and reporting to meet compliance requirements such as GDPR, HIPAA, and SOX. Enterprises can consistently enforce least-privilege access across hybrid and cloud environments while maintaining operational efficiency. Periodic reviews enhance accountability, transparency, and security posture, allowing organizations to demonstrate compliance and reduce the likelihood of internal and external threats exploiting excessive privileges. This solution ensures that access rights remain aligned with organizational policies and regulatory obligations while reducing operational overhead and risk exposure.

Option B, manual spreadsheets tracking user permissions, is error-prone and does not scale. Manual updates require significant effort, are prone to mistakes, and cannot provide real-time enforcement. Spreadsheets cannot integrate with cloud applications or generate audit logs, making compliance verification difficult.

Option C, VPN access control lists updated quarterly, provide network-level control only and do not manage application-level permissions. Quarterly updates are insufficient for dynamic environments, leaving users with excessive privileges for extended periods. ACLs do not provide centralized monitoring, auditing, or reporting.

Option D, local accounts with ad hoc permission audits, is inefficient and insecure. Audits are irregular and unreliable. Local accounts cannot integrate with cloud applications, scale across large organizations, or provide centralized monitoring, leaving sensitive resources vulnerable.

Question49:

An enterprise wants to enable secure collaboration with external partners while maintaining access control and monitoring for compliance. Which solution is most suitable?

A) Microsoft Entra B2B collaboration with Conditional Access and access reviews
B) SharePoint on-premises with unrestricted sharing links
C) Manual email approvals for each external document
D) Local accounts for external collaborators without monitoring

Answer:
A

Explanation:

Option A, Microsoft Entra B2B collaboration with Conditional Access and access reviews, is the most suitable solution for secure external collaboration. B2B collaboration integrates external partners into the organization’s directory while maintaining centralized identity management. Conditional Access evaluates risk signals, device compliance, and user behavior, enforcing adaptive policies such as multi-factor authentication or blocking access for high-risk sign-ins. Access reviews ensure that external collaborators retain access only as long as necessary, minimizing the risk of unauthorized exposure. Audit logs and reporting support regulatory compliance. This solution scales efficiently across multiple partners and projects, reduces administrative overhead, and ensures that sensitive resources remain protected without hindering productivity. Enterprises can securely collaborate with external users while maintaining governance, transparency, and operational efficiency.

Option B, SharePoint on-premises with unrestricted sharing links, is insecure. Open links bypass authentication and access controls, granting uncontrolled access. There is no auditing, time-bound access, or compliance enforcement, increasing the risk of data leakage and regulatory violations.

Option C, manual email approvals for each external document, provides some control but is inefficient and error-prone. It does not scale for frequent collaborations and lacks automated monitoring, auditing, and periodic access reviews.

Option D, local accounts for external collaborators without monitoring, is insecure and impractical. Manual account management cannot scale, enforce centralized policies, or provide audit trails. External users may retain access unnecessarily, increasing the risk of exposure.

Question50:

A multinational enterprise wants to implement a cloud-native zero-trust security model for identity and access management across all applications and devices. Which solution provides the most comprehensive coverage?

A) Microsoft Entra ID Conditional Access with Identity Protection and device compliance
B) Traditional Active Directory password policies
C) VPN access restricted to corporate networks
D) Local accounts with manual provisioning

Answer:
A

Explanation:

Option A, Microsoft Entra ID Conditional Access with Identity Protection and device compliance, provides the most comprehensive solution for cloud-native zero-trust security. Conditional Access evaluates multiple risk signals including user identity, device compliance, geolocation, and behavioral anomalies to enforce adaptive access policies. Identity Protection continuously monitors for compromised accounts, unusual sign-ins, and high-risk activity. Device compliance ensures that only secure, approved endpoints can access corporate resources. Zero-trust principles are applied, granting access based on continuous risk assessment rather than implicit trust. Adaptive controls, such as multi-factor authentication or access blocking, are dynamically applied based on risk levels. Centralized monitoring, auditing, and reporting provide visibility into enterprise security posture and support regulatory compliance. By integrating identity protection, adaptive access, and device compliance, enterprises achieve end-to-end security across hybrid and cloud environments while maintaining secure productivity for global workforces.

Option B, traditional Active Directory password policies, provides limited protection. Password-only policies cannot detect high-risk activity, enforce adaptive access, or ensure device compliance. This approach is insufficient for zero-trust and cannot scale across cloud applications.

Option C, VPN access restricted to corporate networks, offers network-level security only. It does not evaluate identity, device compliance, or behavioral risk. Compromised credentials or insecure devices within allowed networks could still access applications, violating zero-trust principles.

Option D, local accounts with manual provisioning, is highly insecure and not scalable. Manual account management does not provide centralized monitoring, auditing, or adaptive policy enforcement, leaving enterprise resources vulnerable.

Question51:

A global enterprise wants to implement a risk-based authentication system that dynamically adjusts security requirements based on user behavior, device health, and geolocation. Which solution provides the most effective protection?

Answer:
A

Explanation:

Option A, Microsoft Entra ID Conditional Access with Identity Protection and device compliance, is the most effective solution for risk-based authentication. Conditional Access continuously evaluates sign-ins in real time, considering multiple risk signals such as user identity, device health, geolocation, and behavioral anomalies. Identity Protection monitors for suspicious activity, compromised accounts, and unusual login patterns, automatically triggering adaptive controls like multi-factor authentication, access blocks, or password resets for high-risk sign-ins. Device compliance ensures that only secure, managed devices can access enterprise resources, reducing the likelihood of unauthorized access. This approach aligns with zero-trust principles, where access is never assumed but granted based on continuous risk assessment. Centralized monitoring and reporting provide visibility into enterprise security posture and compliance with regulatory requirements. Adaptive enforcement reduces manual intervention, improves operational efficiency, and ensures protection across hybrid and multi-cloud environments. This integrated cloud-native solution protects critical applications, minimizes risk, and ensures productivity for legitimate users, making it essential for modern enterprises facing sophisticated cyber threats.

Option B, traditional Active Directory password expiration policies, offers only static protection. Password-only policies are reactive, do not evaluate risk in real time, and cannot enforce adaptive controls. They are vulnerable to phishing, credential theft, and replay attacks. This method lacks centralized monitoring and cannot scale effectively across cloud applications.

Option C, VPN access restricted to corporate IP ranges, provides network-level control but lacks adaptive, identity-based evaluation. Users with compromised credentials can still access resources from permitted IP ranges. VPNs do not assess device compliance, risk signals, or user behavior and do not integrate with cloud applications for centralized governance, limiting effectiveness.

Option D, local accounts with complex passwords and manual provisioning, is insecure and inefficient. Manual account management cannot enforce adaptive or risk-based policies. Complex passwords alone do not prevent unauthorized access, and local accounts cannot scale to support enterprise environments or zero-trust frameworks.

Question52:

A healthcare organization wants to allow clinicians to securely access patient data from remote locations while maintaining HIPAA compliance. Which solution provides the strongest protection?

Answer:
A

Explanation:

Option A, Microsoft Entra ID Conditional Access with device compliance and risk-based policies, provides the strongest solution for secure remote access in healthcare organizations. Conditional Access evaluates each sign-in based on user identity, device compliance, geolocation, and behavioral patterns. Risk-based policies dynamically enforce multi-factor authentication, block access, or prompt password resets for high-risk activities. Device compliance ensures that only managed and secure endpoints can access sensitive healthcare information, including electronic health records. Identity Protection continuously monitors for compromised accounts or suspicious logins, minimizing unauthorized access. This solution aligns with HIPAA regulations by providing detailed auditing, reporting, and monitoring of access activity. Clinicians can securely access cloud applications remotely, enabling telehealth and hybrid workflows while ensuring patient data is protected. Adaptive controls maintain usability for legitimate users while enforcing strict security measures for high-risk scenarios, supporting zero-trust principles. This approach allows healthcare organizations to maintain operational efficiency without compromising compliance or security.

Option B, traditional Active Directory password policies without MFA, is insufficient. Password-only authentication does not protect against phishing, credential theft, or account compromise. Static policies cannot adapt to real-time risk signals, leaving sensitive patient data exposed and non-compliant with HIPAA regulations.

Option C, VPN access limited to corporate IP ranges, provides network-level security but cannot assess device compliance or user behavior. Compromised credentials can still allow unauthorized access within allowed networks. VPN-only solutions also lack integration with cloud applications and auditing for compliance purposes.

Option D, local accounts with complex passwords and no monitoring, is highly insecure. Manual account management cannot enforce adaptive policies, monitor activity, or provide centralized auditing. Even strong passwords do not prevent unauthorized access, making this solution inadequate for healthcare environments.

Question53:

A multinational enterprise wants to enforce least-privilege access and regularly review user permissions across hybrid and cloud applications. Which solution provides the most scalable and compliant approach?

Answer:
A

Explanation:

Option A, Microsoft Entra ID entitlement management with access reviews, is the most scalable and compliant solution for enforcing least-privilege access. Entitlement management allows administrators to define access packages tied to specific roles and resources, with automated assignment, approval workflows, and dynamic provisioning. Access reviews validate that users retain only the permissions necessary for their current roles, removing outdated or unnecessary access. Automation reduces administrative overhead, prevents orphaned accounts, and mitigates the risk of over-privileged users. Integration with cloud applications provides centralized monitoring, auditing, and reporting for compliance with regulations such as GDPR, HIPAA, and SOX. Enterprises can consistently enforce least-privilege access across hybrid and cloud environments while maintaining operational efficiency. Periodic reviews increase accountability, transparency, and security posture, enabling organizations to demonstrate compliance. This solution prevents internal and external threats from exploiting excessive privileges and ensures access rights remain aligned with organizational policies and regulatory requirements.

Option B, manual spreadsheets tracking user permissions, is error-prone and does not scale. Manual updates require significant effort, are prone to human error, and cannot provide real-time enforcement. Spreadsheets lack integration with cloud applications and cannot generate audit logs, making regulatory compliance difficult to verify.

Option C, VPN access control lists updated quarterly, provide network-level control only and do not manage application-level permissions. Quarterly updates leave users with excessive privileges for long periods. ACLs do not provide centralized monitoring, auditing, or reporting, making them ineffective for least-privilege enforcement.

Question54:

An enterprise wants to enable secure collaboration with external partners while maintaining access control and monitoring for compliance. Which solution is most suitable?

Answer:
A

Explanation:

Option A, Microsoft Entra B2B collaboration with Conditional Access and access reviews, is the most suitable solution for secure external collaboration. B2B collaboration integrates external partners into the organization’s directory while maintaining centralized identity management. Conditional Access evaluates risk signals, device compliance, and user behavior, enforcing adaptive policies such as multi-factor authentication or blocking high-risk sign-ins. Access reviews ensure that external collaborators retain access only as long as necessary, reducing the likelihood of unauthorized exposure. Audit logs and reporting support regulatory compliance requirements. This solution scales efficiently across multiple partners and projects, reduces administrative overhead, and ensures sensitive resources remain protected without hindering productivity. Enterprises can securely collaborate with external users while maintaining governance, transparency, and operational efficiency.

Option B, SharePoint on-premises with unrestricted sharing links, is insecure. Open links bypass authentication and access controls, providing uncontrolled access. There is no auditing, time-bound access, or compliance enforcement, increasing the risk of data leakage and regulatory violations.

Option C, manual email approvals for each external document, is inefficient and error-prone. It does not scale for frequent collaborations and lacks automated monitoring, auditing, and access reviews.

Option D, local accounts for external collaborators without monitoring, is insecure and impractical. Manual account management cannot scale, enforce centralized policies, or provide auditing. External users may retain access unnecessarily, increasing the risk of exposure.

Question55:

Answer:
A

Explanation:

Option A, Microsoft Entra ID Conditional Access with Identity Protection and device compliance, provides the most comprehensive cloud-native zero-trust solution. Conditional Access evaluates multiple risk signals including user identity, device compliance, geolocation, and behavioral anomalies to enforce adaptive access policies. Identity Protection continuously monitors for compromised accounts, unusual sign-ins, and high-risk activity. Device compliance ensures only secure, approved endpoints can access corporate resources. Zero-trust principles are applied, granting access based on continuous risk assessment rather than implicit trust. Adaptive controls such as multi-factor authentication or access blocking are dynamically applied based on risk. Centralized monitoring, auditing, and reporting provide visibility into enterprise security posture and support regulatory compliance. By integrating identity protection, adaptive access, and device compliance, enterprises achieve end-to-end protection across hybrid and cloud environments while maintaining secure productivity for global workforces.

Question56:

A multinational enterprise wants to implement a cloud-native adaptive access solution that evaluates user behavior, device health, and risk signals in real time. Which solution provides the most effective protection?

Answer:
A

Explanation:

Option A, Microsoft Entra ID Conditional Access with Identity Protection and device compliance, is the most effective solution for adaptive access. Conditional Access evaluates each sign-in in real time, considering multiple risk signals such as user identity, device compliance, location, and behavioral anomalies. Identity Protection continuously monitors for compromised accounts, suspicious sign-ins, and high-risk activity, automatically triggering adaptive responses like multi-factor authentication, access blocks, or password resets. Device compliance ensures that only secure, managed endpoints can access sensitive resources, reducing the risk of unauthorized access. This approach aligns with zero-trust principles, granting access only based on continuous evaluation of identity and device risk rather than implicit trust. Centralized monitoring, reporting, and auditing provide visibility into user behavior, risk events, and compliance posture. Adaptive enforcement reduces administrative effort, scales across hybrid and cloud environments, and ensures operational efficiency while maintaining security. This integrated cloud-native approach protects critical applications, minimizes exposure to threats, and ensures that legitimate users experience minimal friction. Enterprises benefit from automated threat detection, real-time risk assessment, and compliance reporting, making this solution essential for modern organizations managing distributed workforces and sensitive data.

Option B, traditional Active Directory password expiration policies, offers only static, reactive protection. Password-only policies cannot adapt to real-time risk or suspicious activity. They are vulnerable to phishing, credential theft, and replay attacks. This method lacks centralized monitoring, auditing, and adaptive enforcement, and cannot scale effectively for cloud applications.

Option C, VPN access restricted to corporate IP ranges, provides network-level security but lacks adaptive, identity-based evaluation. Users with compromised credentials could access permitted networks. VPNs do not assess device compliance, user behavior, or risk signals, and they do not integrate with cloud applications for centralized governance.

Option D, local accounts with complex passwords and manual provisioning, is highly insecure and operationally inefficient. Manual account management cannot enforce adaptive or risk-based policies. Complex passwords alone do not prevent unauthorized access, and local accounts cannot scale to enterprise environments or zero-trust frameworks.

Question57:

A healthcare organization wants clinicians to securely access electronic health records remotely while maintaining HIPAA compliance. Which solution provides the strongest security?

Answer:
A

Explanation:

Option A, Microsoft Entra ID Conditional Access with device compliance and risk-based policies, provides the strongest protection for secure remote access in healthcare. Conditional Access evaluates each login attempt in real time, considering user identity, device compliance, geolocation, and behavioral risk signals. Risk-based policies enforce multi-factor authentication, block access, or prompt password resets for high-risk sign-ins. Device compliance ensures only secure, managed endpoints can access sensitive patient data, including electronic health records. Identity Protection monitors for compromised accounts and suspicious activity, minimizing the risk of unauthorized access. This solution supports HIPAA compliance through detailed auditing, monitoring, and reporting. Clinicians can securely access cloud applications remotely, enabling telehealth and hybrid workflows without compromising patient data. Adaptive policies maintain usability for legitimate users while enforcing strict security controls for high-risk scenarios, supporting zero-trust principles. Centralized monitoring and automation reduce administrative effort and enhance the organization’s overall security posture.

Option B, traditional Active Directory password policies without MFA, is insufficient. Password-only authentication cannot prevent credential theft or phishing attacks. Static policies do not assess real-time risk, leaving sensitive patient data exposed and non-compliant with HIPAA.

Option C, VPN access limited to corporate IP ranges, provides network-level security but cannot assess device compliance or user behavior. Compromised credentials could still allow unauthorized access within allowed networks, and VPNs do not provide auditing or integration with cloud applications for compliance.

Option D, local accounts with complex passwords and no monitoring, is highly insecure. Manual account management cannot enforce adaptive policies or provide centralized auditing. Even strong passwords cannot prevent unauthorized access, making this solution unsuitable for healthcare organizations.

Question58:

A multinational enterprise wants to enforce least-privilege access across hybrid and cloud environments and conduct regular access reviews. Which solution is the most scalable and compliant?

Answer:
A

Explanation:

Option A, Microsoft Entra ID entitlement management with access reviews, is the most scalable and compliant solution for least-privilege enforcement. Entitlement management allows administrators to create access packages tied to specific roles and resources, with automated assignment, approval workflows, and dynamic provisioning. Access reviews validate that users retain only the permissions necessary for their roles and remove unnecessary access. Automation reduces administrative effort, prevents orphaned accounts, and mitigates the risk of over-privileged users. Integration with cloud applications provides centralized monitoring, auditing, and reporting for compliance with regulations such as GDPR, HIPAA, and SOX. Enterprises can enforce least-privilege access consistently across hybrid and cloud environments while maintaining operational efficiency. Periodic reviews increase accountability, transparency, and security posture, enabling organizations to demonstrate compliance. This solution prevents internal and external threats from exploiting excessive privileges, ensuring that access rights remain aligned with organizational policies and regulatory requirements while minimizing operational overhead and risk exposure.

Option B, manual spreadsheets tracking user permissions, is error-prone and does not scale. Manual updates require significant effort, are prone to mistakes, and cannot provide real-time enforcement. Spreadsheets do not integrate with cloud applications and cannot generate audit logs, making regulatory compliance difficult.

Option C, VPN access control lists updated quarterly, provide network-level control only and do not manage application-level permissions. Quarterly updates leave users with excessive privileges for long periods. ACLs lack centralized monitoring, auditing, and reporting capabilities, making them ineffective for least-privilege enforcement.

Option D, local accounts with ad hoc permission audits, are inefficient and insecure. Audits are irregular and unreliable. Local accounts cannot integrate with cloud applications, scale across large enterprises, or provide centralized monitoring, leaving sensitive resources exposed to unauthorized access.

Question59:

An enterprise wants to securely collaborate with external partners while maintaining access control and compliance monitoring. Which solution is most suitable?

Answer:
A

Explanation:

Option A, Microsoft Entra B2B collaboration with Conditional Access and access reviews, is the most suitable solution for secure external collaboration. B2B collaboration integrates external partners into the organization’s directory while maintaining centralized identity management. Conditional Access evaluates risk signals, device compliance, and user behavior, enforcing adaptive policies such as multi-factor authentication or blocking high-risk sign-ins. Access reviews ensure that external collaborators retain access only as long as necessary, reducing the risk of unauthorized exposure. Audit logs and reporting support regulatory compliance. This solution scales efficiently across multiple partners and projects, reduces administrative overhead, and ensures sensitive resources remain protected without hindering productivity. Enterprises can collaborate securely with external users while maintaining governance, transparency, and operational efficiency.

Option C, manual email approvals for each external document, introduces some control but is inefficient and error-prone. It does not scale for frequent collaborations and lacks automated monitoring, auditing, and access reviews.

Option D, local accounts for external collaborators without monitoring, is insecure and impractical. Manual account management cannot scale, enforce centralized policies, or provide auditing. External users may retain access unnecessarily, increasing the risk of exposure.

Question60:

A multinational enterprise wants to implement a zero-trust security model for identity and access management across all applications and devices. Which solution provides the most comprehensive coverage?

Answer:
A

Explanation:

Option A, Microsoft Entra ID Conditional Access with Identity Protection and device compliance, provides the most comprehensive zero-trust solution for cloud-native environments. Conditional Access evaluates multiple risk signals, including user identity, device compliance, geolocation, and behavioral anomalies, to enforce adaptive access policies. Identity Protection continuously monitors for compromised accounts, unusual sign-ins, and high-risk activities. Device compliance ensures that only secure, approved endpoints can access corporate resources. Zero-trust principles are applied, granting access based on continuous evaluation of identity and device health rather than implicit trust. Adaptive controls such as multi-factor authentication or access blocking are applied dynamically based on real-time risk assessment. Centralized monitoring, auditing, and reporting provide visibility into enterprise security posture and support regulatory compliance. This integrated approach enables enterprises to achieve end-to-end protection across hybrid and cloud environments while maintaining secure productivity for global workforces.

Option B, traditional Active Directory password policies, provides limited protection. Password-only policies cannot detect high-risk activities, enforce adaptive access, or ensure device compliance. This method is insufficient for zero-trust models and cannot scale effectively in cloud environments.

Option C, VPN access restricted to corporate networks, provides network-level security only. It does not evaluate user identity, device compliance, or behavioral risks. Compromised credentials or insecure devices within permitted networks could still access resources, violating zero-trust principles.

Option D, local accounts with manual provisioning, is insecure and not scalable. Manual account management does not provide centralized monitoring, auditing, or adaptive policy enforcement, leaving enterprise resources vulnerable.

Option A: Microsoft Entra ID Conditional Access with Identity Protection and device compliance

Microsoft Entra ID Conditional Access combined with Identity Protection and device compliance delivers a fully integrated zero-trust security framework tailored for modern, cloud-native enterprises. This approach is designed to continuously validate trust rather than relying on static, implicit assumptions about users or devices. Conditional Access evaluates every access attempt by analyzing multiple risk signals simultaneously. These include the user’s identity and role, the health and compliance status of their device, geographic location, network conditions, and behavioral patterns such as unusual sign-ins or anomalous activity. By dynamically evaluating these factors, Conditional Access enforces context-aware policies that can adapt to the current risk level, providing both security and flexibility for end users.

Identity Protection enhances this security framework by providing continuous monitoring of all accounts for suspicious or high-risk behavior. It can detect indicators of compromise, such as repeated failed login attempts, sign-ins from unexpected locations, or the use of known breached credentials. When risks are identified, Identity Protection can trigger automated responses, including requiring multi-factor authentication (MFA), temporarily blocking access, or initiating password resets. This automation reduces the burden on IT teams and ensures that potential threats are mitigated immediately, minimizing the window of vulnerability for enterprise resources.

Device compliance is another essential component of this zero-trust model. By requiring that endpoints meet security standards—such as operating system updates, encryption, antivirus protection, and policy enforcement—organizations prevent insecure or unmanaged devices from gaining access to sensitive data. This ensures that security is enforced not only at the identity level but also at the device level. By combining identity verification, behavioral risk assessment, and device compliance, enterprises achieve a comprehensive and proactive security posture.

Additionally, this integrated model provides centralized auditing and reporting capabilities. Security teams gain visibility into every access attempt, policy enforcement action, and device compliance check, allowing for detailed analysis, regulatory reporting, and forensic investigation if required. This transparency also facilitates continuous improvement of security policies, as real-world data on user behavior, device usage, and threat activity informs policy refinement. The combination of Conditional Access, Identity Protection, and device compliance allows organizations to securely enable productivity across hybrid and cloud environments, providing users with frictionless access when risks are low while dynamically enforcing stringent controls when risks are high.

Option B: Traditional Active Directory password policies

Traditional Active Directory password policies are designed to provide a baseline level of security through static controls. These policies typically enforce password complexity, expiration intervals, and account lockout thresholds. While these measures help prevent certain types of attacks, such as brute-force attempts, they are inherently limited in their scope. Password-only policies cannot assess real-time risk factors associated with login attempts. For example, a user logging in from an unusual location on a new device may present a high security risk, but traditional password policies cannot detect or respond to this scenario.

In addition, static password policies do not account for the security posture of devices attempting to access enterprise resources. A compromised or unpatched device could still log in with valid credentials, exposing sensitive data to potential threats. There is also no automated response mechanism for detecting and mitigating suspicious behavior, which means that high-risk activities may go unnoticed until a breach is discovered.

From a scalability perspective, traditional Active Directory password policies are less effective in cloud and hybrid environments. Managing passwords and enforcing policies across multiple on-premises and cloud applications requires additional administrative overhead. Users may face friction due to frequent password changes or complexity requirements, leading to workarounds that undermine security, such as writing passwords down or reusing them across multiple accounts. Furthermore, these policies lack integrated monitoring or reporting capabilities, providing little visibility into risk levels, access trends, or anomalous activities. In essence, while password policies serve as a basic layer of security, they are insufficient for a modern zero-trust architecture, where continuous evaluation and adaptive enforcement are essential.

Option C: VPN access restricted to corporate networks

VPN access provides a method of securing network communication by creating an encrypted tunnel between users and corporate resources. Restricting VPN access to approved networks offers a basic layer of protection, ensuring that only connections from specific IP addresses or locations are allowed. However, this approach is limited in its ability to enforce a zero-trust security model. VPNs focus primarily on network perimeter defense and assume that users and devices within the permitted network can be trusted. This implicit trust model is vulnerable to compromised credentials or infected devices, which can gain unrestricted access once connected to the VPN.

A VPN does not evaluate the identity of the user beyond authentication credentials, nor does it check the compliance status of devices accessing the network. Behavioral risks, unusual login patterns, or other indicators of compromise are not detected. Furthermore, as organizations adopt cloud-based applications and hybrid infrastructures, reliance on VPNs creates operational challenges. Users may need to route all traffic through the VPN, causing latency, performance issues, and increased infrastructure complexity. Scaling VPN access to support remote and globally distributed workforces is resource-intensive and does not inherently reduce risk. While VPNs may protect network traffic from interception, they fail to address the modern enterprise need for identity-based, context-aware security that is adaptive to real-time threats.

Option D: Local accounts with manual provisioning

Local accounts with manual provisioning represent the least secure approach to identity and access management. In this model, accounts are created, managed, and deleted manually by administrators, which is labor-intensive and prone to human error. Manual processes often result in inconsistent application of security policies, such as weak passwords, prolonged access for inactive users, or incorrect permission assignments. This creates multiple vulnerabilities that can be exploited by attackers.

Manual provisioning also lacks centralized visibility and monitoring, making it nearly impossible to detect suspicious behavior or unauthorized access in real time. Security teams have limited ability to audit account activity or enforce consistent compliance standards. Furthermore, local accounts do not integrate effectively with cloud-based applications, hybrid environments, or modern identity services. Users may require multiple credentials for different systems, increasing the likelihood of password reuse, weak security practices, and potential breaches.

Without automation or policy enforcement, local accounts fail to implement adaptive security measures such as risk-based multi-factor authentication, access restrictions based on device health, or dynamic response to behavioral anomalies. This static and fragmented approach cannot scale to support modern enterprise needs, leaving critical resources exposed. Organizations relying on manual account management face operational inefficiencies, heightened security risks, and significant challenges in meeting compliance requirements.

Microsoft SC-100 Cybersecurity Architect Exam Dumps and Practice Test Questions Set 4 Q46-60

Related posts: