Microsoft SC-100 Cybersecurity Architect Exam Dumps and Practice Test Questions Set 8 Q106-120

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

Question106:

A financial services organization wants to enforce adaptive access policies across all cloud and on-premises applications that evaluate user identity, device compliance, and risk signals in real time. Which solution provides the most comprehensive protection?

A) Microsoft Entra ID Conditional Access with Identity Protection and device compliance
B) Traditional Active Directory password policies without MFA
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, provides the most comprehensive solution for enforcing adaptive access policies in both cloud and on-premises applications. Conditional Access evaluates each sign-in attempt in real time by analyzing multiple signals such as user identity, device compliance, geolocation, and behavioral anomalies. Identity Protection continuously monitors for compromised accounts, unusual sign-ins, and high-risk activity, automatically triggering adaptive responses such as multi-factor authentication, access blocking, or password reset requirements. Device compliance ensures that only approved and secure endpoints can access enterprise resources, reducing the likelihood of unauthorized access. This approach follows zero-trust principles, granting access dynamically based on risk assessment rather than static credentials. Centralized monitoring, auditing, and reporting provide full visibility into user activity, risk events, and compliance with regulatory requirements, allowing proactive threat mitigation. Adaptive enforcement reduces administrative overhead, scales efficiently across hybrid and multi-cloud environments, and ensures seamless user experiences while protecting sensitive financial data. Combining real-time risk evaluation, identity protection, and device compliance strengthens the overall security posture and reduces exposure to internal and external threats.

Option B, traditional Active Directory password policies without MFA, is static and insufficient. Password-only authentication cannot respond to real-time threats or enforce adaptive controls. This approach is vulnerable to phishing, credential theft, and replay attacks. It also lacks integration with cloud applications, centralized auditing, and compliance reporting, which are critical in financial environments.

Option C, VPN access restricted to corporate IP ranges, provides network-level security only. It does not assess user identity, device compliance, or behavioral signals. A compromised credential from a permitted IP could still allow unauthorized access. VPN-only solutions cannot integrate with cloud applications for centralized governance or auditing, limiting their effectiveness for modern zero-trust architectures.

Option D, local accounts with complex passwords and manual provisioning, are operationally inefficient and insecure. Manual account management cannot enforce adaptive policies or provide centralized monitoring. Even strong passwords cannot prevent unauthorized access if credentials are stolen or misused. Local accounts are not scalable for enterprise zero-trust models and do not support real-time risk-based access evaluation.

Question107:

A healthcare provider requires clinicians to access patient records remotely while ensuring HIPAA compliance. Which solution is the most secure and compliant?

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, is the most secure and compliant solution for remote access to patient records. Conditional Access evaluates user sign-ins in real time, analyzing identity, device compliance, geolocation, and behavioral patterns. Risk-based policies dynamically enforce multi-factor authentication, block access, or require password resets for high-risk scenarios. Device compliance ensures that only secure, managed devices can access sensitive patient data. Identity Protection continuously monitors for suspicious or compromised accounts, reducing the risk of unauthorized access. This solution also provides detailed auditing, monitoring, and reporting capabilities that support HIPAA compliance. Clinicians benefit from secure access without unnecessary friction, enabling telehealth and hybrid workflows while maintaining patient privacy. Adaptive policies enforce zero-trust principles, balancing security and usability. Centralized monitoring and automated enforcement reduce administrative effort, improve operational efficiency, and enhance the organization’s overall security posture.

Option B, traditional Active Directory password policies without MFA, is inadequate for healthcare. Password-only authentication does not protect against phishing, credential theft, or compromised accounts, leaving patient records exposed. Such a solution fails to meet HIPAA compliance standards.

Option C, VPN access limited to corporate IP ranges, provides network-level security but cannot evaluate device compliance or user behavior. VPN-only solutions are insufficient for remote access in cloud environments, and compromised credentials could allow unauthorized access. Centralized auditing and compliance monitoring are also limited.

Option D, local accounts with complex passwords and no monitoring, are insecure. Manual account management cannot enforce adaptive policies, provide centralized auditing, or ensure compliance. Even strong passwords cannot prevent unauthorized access or maintain HIPAA compliance.

Question108:

A multinational enterprise wants to enforce least-privilege access across cloud and hybrid applications while performing periodic access reviews to maintain compliance. Which solution is most scalable and secure?

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 secure solution for least-privilege enforcement. Entitlement management enables administrators to create access packages linked to specific roles and resources, supporting automated assignment, approval workflows, and dynamic provisioning. Periodic access reviews ensure users retain only the permissions required for their current roles, removing excess or outdated access. Automation reduces administrative burden, prevents orphaned accounts, and mitigates risks from over-privileged users. Integration with cloud applications allows centralized monitoring, auditing, and reporting, supporting compliance frameworks such as GDPR, HIPAA, and SOX. Organizations can enforce least-privilege policies consistently across hybrid and cloud environments while maintaining operational efficiency. Periodic access reviews enhance transparency, accountability, and overall security posture. This approach minimizes insider threats and external risk by ensuring that user permissions align with organizational policies and regulatory requirements.

Option B, manual spreadsheets tracking permissions, is error-prone and non-scalable. Manual updates are labor-intensive, prone to mistakes, and cannot enforce real-time access controls. Spreadsheets also lack integration with cloud applications, centralized auditing, or compliance reporting, making them unsuitable for large enterprises.

Option C, VPN access control lists updated quarterly, only provide network-level controls. They do not manage permissions at the application level and leave users with potentially excessive privileges for extended periods. ACLs cannot provide centralized auditing or reporting, reducing their effectiveness for least-privilege enforcement.

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

Question109:

An enterprise requires secure collaboration with external partners while maintaining access control and compliance monitoring. Which solution is most appropriate?

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 enterprise directory while maintaining centralized identity management. Conditional Access evaluates user behavior, risk signals, and device compliance to enforce adaptive policies such as multi-factor authentication or access blocking for high-risk sign-ins. Access reviews ensure external collaborators retain access only as needed, reducing the risk of unauthorized exposure. Audit logs and reporting provide regulatory compliance support. This approach scales efficiently across multiple projects and partner organizations, reduces administrative overhead, and ensures sensitive resources remain protected without impeding productivity. Organizations can collaborate securely 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. Auditing and compliance enforcement are absent, increasing the risk of data leakage.

Option C, manual email approvals for external documents, 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, are insecure and impractical. Manual account management cannot scale or enforce centralized policies, leaving external access unmonitored and increasing exposure risk.

Question110:

A global 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 cloud-native zero-trust security model. 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 enterprise resources. Zero-trust principles are applied by granting access dynamically based on continuous risk evaluation rather than implicit trust. Adaptive controls such as multi-factor authentication or access blocking are applied in real time based on risk assessment. Centralized monitoring, auditing, and reporting provide visibility into the enterprise’s security posture and support regulatory compliance. This integrated approach enables end-to-end protection across hybrid and cloud environments while maintaining productivity for global workforces.

Option B, traditional Active Directory password policies, is insufficient for zero-trust. Password-only policies cannot detect high-risk activity, enforce adaptive access, or validate device compliance, leaving systems vulnerable.

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

Option D, local accounts with manual provisioning, are insecure and non-scalable. Manual account management cannot enforce adaptive policies or centralized monitoring, leaving enterprise resources exposed.

Question111:

A multinational enterprise wants to enforce adaptive access for all users accessing cloud applications from both corporate and personal devices. Which solution ensures the highest level of security and compliance?

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

Answer:
A

Explanation:

Option A, Microsoft Entra ID Conditional Access with device compliance and Identity Protection, provides the most comprehensive adaptive access solution. Conditional Access evaluates every sign-in attempt in real time, taking into account user identity, device compliance, location, and behavioral anomalies. Identity Protection continuously monitors for compromised accounts, unusual sign-ins, and high-risk activities. Risk-based policies enforce adaptive responses such as multi-factor authentication, access blocking, or password resets for high-risk events. Device compliance ensures only managed and secure devices can access sensitive enterprise applications, reducing the likelihood of unauthorized access from personal devices. This solution embodies zero-trust principles by granting access dynamically based on continuous evaluation rather than static trust assumptions. Centralized monitoring, auditing, and reporting provide visibility into access events, user behavior, and compliance status. Administrators can automate policy enforcement to reduce operational overhead while scaling effectively across hybrid and multi-cloud environments. By combining real-time risk evaluation, identity protection, and device compliance, organizations enhance security, reduce exposure to insider and external threats, and maintain regulatory compliance across all geographic regions.

Option B, traditional Active Directory password expiration policies, is inadequate for adaptive access. Password-only policies cannot respond to real-time threats, detect anomalous behavior, or enforce risk-based controls. They leave organizations vulnerable to credential theft, phishing attacks, and replay attacks, and cannot provide centralized auditing or cloud integration.

Option C, VPN access restricted to corporate IP ranges only, provides network-level security but cannot assess device compliance or user behavior. Compromised credentials can still allow unauthorized access from approved IP addresses. VPN-only solutions do not integrate with cloud applications or provide centralized monitoring and compliance enforcement.

Option D, local accounts with complex passwords and manual provisioning, are operationally inefficient and insecure. Manual account management cannot enforce adaptive, risk-based policies, and even strong passwords alone cannot prevent unauthorized access. Local accounts do not scale for global enterprises or cloud environments and cannot provide real-time monitoring or auditing.

Question112:

A healthcare organization wants clinicians to securely access electronic health records remotely while ensuring HIPAA compliance. Which solution is best suited for this scenario?

A) Microsoft Entra ID Conditional Access with device compliance and risk-based policies
B) Traditional Active Directory password policies without MFA
C) VPN access restricted to corporate IP addresses
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, is the most secure and compliant solution for remote access to patient data. Conditional Access evaluates each sign-in attempt in real time by analyzing user identity, device compliance, geolocation, and behavioral patterns. Risk-based policies enforce multi-factor authentication or block access for high-risk events. Device compliance ensures only secure, managed endpoints can access electronic health records, minimizing the risk of unauthorized access. Identity Protection continuously monitors for compromised accounts and suspicious activity, enhancing security and reducing exposure to internal and external threats. This solution also provides comprehensive auditing, monitoring, and reporting capabilities that support HIPAA compliance requirements. Clinicians can access cloud applications securely, enabling telehealth and hybrid workflows, while maintaining privacy and minimizing friction. Adaptive access policies enforce zero-trust principles, allowing secure access while maintaining operational efficiency. Centralized monitoring, automated enforcement, and reporting improve security posture and reduce administrative burden.

Option B, traditional Active Directory password policies without MFA, is insufficient for healthcare. Password-only authentication cannot prevent phishing, credential theft, or unauthorized access. This approach fails to meet HIPAA compliance standards and leaves sensitive patient information exposed.

Option C, VPN access restricted to corporate IP addresses, provides network-level security but does not assess device compliance or user behavior. VPN-only solutions are inadequate for remote cloud access, and compromised credentials can bypass this control. Centralized monitoring and compliance reporting are limited.

Option D, local accounts with complex passwords and no monitoring, are insecure. Manual account management cannot enforce adaptive policies, ensure compliance, or provide auditing. Even strong passwords cannot prevent unauthorized access.

Question113:

A global enterprise wants to enforce least-privilege access across hybrid and cloud applications while performing periodic access reviews. Which solution is most scalable and compliant?

Answer:
A

Explanation:

Option A, Microsoft Entra ID entitlement management with access reviews, is the most scalable and secure solution for enforcing least-privilege access. Entitlement management allows administrators to define access packages tied to specific roles and resources, supporting automated assignment, approval workflows, and dynamic provisioning. Periodic access reviews verify that users maintain only the permissions necessary for their current roles, automatically 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, supporting regulatory compliance frameworks such as GDPR, HIPAA, and SOX. Enterprises can consistently enforce least-privilege policies across hybrid and cloud environments while maintaining operational efficiency. Periodic access reviews enhance transparency, accountability, and security posture, minimizing insider threats and exposure to external attacks. This approach ensures user permissions align with organizational policies and compliance requirements while providing scalability and automation for large enterprise environments.

Option B, manual spreadsheets tracking permissions, is error-prone and not scalable. Manual updates are labor-intensive, prone to errors, and cannot enforce real-time access controls. Spreadsheets lack integration with cloud applications, auditing, and compliance reporting, making them unsuitable for enterprises.

Option C, VPN access control lists updated quarterly, only provide network-level controls 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, reducing effectiveness for least-privilege enforcement.

Option D, local accounts with ad hoc permission audits, are inefficient and insecure. Irregular audits cannot ensure compliance or prevent over-privileged access. Local accounts do not scale across large enterprises and cannot integrate with cloud applications or centralized monitoring systems.

Question114:

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

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

Answer:
A

Explanation:

Option A, Microsoft Entra B2B collaboration with Conditional Access and access reviews, provides the most suitable solution for secure external collaboration. B2B collaboration allows external partners to be integrated into the enterprise directory while maintaining centralized identity and access 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 external collaborators retain access only for the duration required, reducing the risk of unauthorized exposure. Audit logs and reporting support regulatory compliance requirements. This solution scales efficiently across multiple partner organizations and projects, reduces administrative overhead, and ensures sensitive resources remain protected without hindering productivity. Enterprises can collaborate securely while maintaining governance, transparency, and operational efficiency.

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

Option C, manual email approvals for external documents, provides limited 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, are insecure and impractical. Manual account management cannot scale, enforce centralized policies, or provide auditing. External users may retain access unnecessarily, increasing exposure risk.

Question115:

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?

Answer:
A

Explanation:

Option A, Microsoft Entra ID Conditional Access with Identity Protection and device compliance, provides the most comprehensive cloud-native zero-trust security 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 that only secure, approved endpoints can access enterprise resources. Zero-trust principles are enforced by granting access dynamically based on continuous risk evaluation rather than implicit trust. Adaptive controls such as multi-factor authentication or access blocking are applied in real time according to risk assessment. Centralized monitoring, auditing, and reporting provide visibility into enterprise security posture and support regulatory compliance. This integrated approach enables end-to-end protection across hybrid and cloud environments while maintaining 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 validate device compliance, leaving systems vulnerable.

Option D, local accounts with manual provisioning, are insecure and non-scalable. Manual account management cannot enforce adaptive policies, centralized monitoring, or risk-based access controls, leaving enterprise resources exposed.

Question116:

A global enterprise wants to implement adaptive access policies for all employees accessing cloud applications from managed and unmanaged devices. Which solution provides the most secure and scalable approach?

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, provides the most secure and scalable solution for adaptive access across managed and unmanaged devices. Conditional Access evaluates sign-ins in real time, analyzing user identity, device compliance, location, and behavioral anomalies. Identity Protection continuously monitors for high-risk activity, compromised accounts, and unusual sign-in patterns, enforcing adaptive responses such as multi-factor authentication, access blocking, or password resets. Device compliance ensures only secure, approved endpoints access enterprise resources, mitigating risks from unmanaged devices. This approach aligns with zero-trust principles, granting access based on continuous risk assessment rather than static trust. Centralized monitoring, auditing, and reporting provide visibility into access events, security risks, and compliance adherence. Adaptive enforcement reduces administrative overhead, supports hybrid and cloud environments, and maintains seamless user experiences. By integrating real-time risk evaluation, identity protection, and device compliance, enterprises reduce exposure to insider and external threats while ensuring regulatory compliance.

Option B, traditional Active Directory password expiration policies, is limited. Password-only security cannot respond to real-time threats, detect unusual behavior, or enforce adaptive policies. It is vulnerable to phishing, credential theft, and replay attacks, and cannot provide centralized monitoring or cloud integration.

Option C, VPN access restricted to corporate IP ranges, provides network-level security but does not evaluate device compliance or user behavior. Compromised credentials from allowed IP addresses could allow unauthorized access. VPN-only solutions lack centralized auditing, reporting, and integration with cloud applications, making them insufficient for modern adaptive access requirements.

Option D, local accounts with complex passwords and manual provisioning, are inefficient and insecure. Manual account management cannot enforce adaptive, risk-based policies. Even strong passwords cannot prevent unauthorized access. Local accounts do not scale for global enterprises or cloud environments and do not provide real-time monitoring or auditing.

Question117:

A healthcare organization requires clinicians to access electronic health records remotely while ensuring HIPAA compliance. Which solution provides secure and compliant access?

A) Microsoft Entra ID Conditional Access with device compliance and risk-based policies
B) Traditional Active Directory password policies without MFA
C) VPN access restricted 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, is the most secure and compliant solution for remote access to patient data. Conditional Access evaluates each sign-in attempt in real time, considering user identity, device compliance, geolocation, and behavioral anomalies. Risk-based policies enforce multi-factor authentication, block access, or require password resets for high-risk scenarios. Device compliance ensures that only secure, managed devices can access sensitive electronic health records, reducing the risk of unauthorized access. Identity Protection monitors for compromised accounts and suspicious activity, mitigating internal and external threats. This solution provides detailed auditing, monitoring, and reporting capabilities to meet HIPAA compliance requirements. Clinicians can securely access cloud applications, enabling telehealth and hybrid workflows, while maintaining privacy. Adaptive policies enforce zero-trust principles, balancing security and usability. Centralized monitoring, automated enforcement, and reporting enhance the organization’s security posture, reduce administrative burden, and ensure compliance with healthcare regulations.

Option B, traditional Active Directory password policies without MFA, is inadequate. Password-only authentication cannot prevent phishing, credential theft, or unauthorized access, and does not satisfy HIPAA compliance standards.

Option C, VPN access restricted to corporate IP ranges, provides network-level security but does not evaluate device compliance or user behavior. VPN-only solutions are insufficient for remote cloud access, and compromised credentials can bypass controls. Centralized auditing and compliance monitoring are limited.

Option D, local accounts with complex passwords and no monitoring, are insecure. Manual account management cannot enforce adaptive policies, ensure compliance, or provide auditing. Strong passwords alone do not prevent unauthorized access.

Question118:

A multinational enterprise wants to enforce least-privilege access across hybrid and cloud applications while performing periodic access reviews. Which solution is the most scalable and compliant?

Answer:
A

Explanation:

Option A, Microsoft Entra ID entitlement management with access reviews, provides the most scalable and secure solution for enforcing least-privilege access. Entitlement management allows administrators to define access packages tied to specific roles and resources, supporting automated assignment, approval workflows, and dynamic provisioning. Periodic access reviews ensure users maintain only the permissions necessary for their current roles, automatically removing unnecessary or outdated access. Automation reduces administrative overhead, prevents orphaned accounts, and mitigates risks from over-privileged users. Integration with cloud applications enables centralized monitoring, auditing, and reporting, supporting regulatory compliance such as GDPR, HIPAA, and SOX. Enterprises can consistently enforce least-privilege policies across hybrid and cloud environments while maintaining operational efficiency. Periodic access reviews enhance transparency, accountability, and security posture, minimizing insider threats and external attack risks. This solution ensures user permissions align with organizational policies and compliance requirements while providing scalability and automation for global enterprises.

Option B, manual spreadsheets tracking permissions, is error-prone and non-scalable. Manual updates are labor-intensive, prone to errors, and cannot enforce real-time access controls. Spreadsheets lack integration with cloud applications, auditing, or compliance reporting.

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

Option D, local accounts with ad hoc permission audits, are inefficient and insecure. Irregular audits cannot ensure compliance or prevent over-privileged access. Local accounts do not scale for global enterprises and cannot integrate with cloud applications or centralized monitoring systems.

Question119:

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

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 enterprise directory while maintaining centralized identity and access 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 external collaborators retain access only as long as necessary, reducing the risk of unauthorized exposure. Audit logs and reporting support regulatory compliance requirements. This solution scales efficiently across multiple partner organizations and projects, reduces administrative overhead, and ensures sensitive resources remain protected without hindering productivity. Enterprises can collaborate securely while maintaining governance, transparency, and operational efficiency.

Question120:
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 cloud-native zero-trust security 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 enterprise resources. Zero-trust principles are enforced by granting access dynamically based on continuous risk evaluation rather than implicit trust. Adaptive controls such as multi-factor authentication or access blocking are applied in real time according to risk assessment. Centralized monitoring, auditing, and reporting provide visibility into enterprise security posture and support regulatory compliance. This integrated approach enables end-to-end protection across hybrid and cloud environments while maintaining productivity for global workforces.

Option B, traditional Active Directory password policies, is insufficient. Password-only policies cannot detect high-risk activity, enforce adaptive access, or validate device compliance, leaving systems vulnerable.

Option A, Microsoft Entra ID Conditional Access with Identity Protection and device compliance, represents the most complete, mature, and scalable zero-trust security approach for modern enterprises that rely heavily on cloud services, hybrid infrastructure, and distributed workforces. This option is designed to handle the realities of contemporary cyber threats, where identity has become the primary security perimeter and attackers frequently target user accounts, session tokens, devices, and misconfigurations. Conditional Access works by evaluating every authentication request through a wide range of real-time signals. These signals include the user’s identity, their typical behavior, their current location, the nature of the device they are using, the application being accessed, and the sensitivity of the resource. By interpreting these signals collectively, Conditional Access can enforce decisions that reflect the actual risk level of the session rather than relying on static or outdated rules.

Identity Protection enhances this risk-driven model by analyzing ongoing activity patterns across the organization. It can identify compromised credentials, leaked passwords, suspicious travel patterns, and unusual spikes in login attempts. Instead of merely providing notifications, it allows organizations to respond automatically through Conditional Access. For example, a medium-risk user might be required to complete multi-factor authentication before proceeding, whereas a high-risk user might be completely blocked until the threat is remediated. This kind of automated response ensures that the organization isn’t waiting for manual intervention while an attacker actively attempts to gain access.

Device compliance is another critical layer within this option. In many cyber incidents, attackers gain access not only through stolen credentials but also through unmanaged, outdated, or insecure endpoints. Device compliance ensures that every device attempting access must meet organizational standards. These requirements may include using updated operating systems, encrypted storage, secure boot, antivirus protection, and configuration profiles managed by the organization. By validating device health before granting access, enterprises prevent compromised, jailbroken, or non-compliant devices from reaching sensitive systems, even if credentials appear legitimate.

In contrast to traditional network-level or perimeter-based approaches, this model does not trust a device simply because it resides on a corporate network. The identity and health of the device must be validated for every session. This core principle of zero trust—never trust, always verify—ensures that even internal access is continuously evaluated. This drastically reduces the risk of lateral movement in case an attacker breaches one part of the environment.

Adaptive enforcement is one of the greatest strengths of Conditional Access. Unlike inflexible access policies that treat every login the same, adaptive policies tailor responses based on one’s risk level. This approach not only enhances security but also improves user experience. A low-risk user accessing a low-sensitivity application on a compliant, managed device may not be required to complete MFA each time, reducing friction. Meanwhile, a user accessing sensitive financial data from an unfamiliar device or location will be challenged with strict authentication controls. This balance ensures that productivity is maintained without compromising security.

Furthermore, Option A includes centralized visibility into every authentication attempt, policy decision, and device compliance status across the environment. This centralized monitoring is essential for investigative work, compliance audits, and continuous improvement of security posture. Enterprises can examine sign-in logs, risk assessments, Conditional Access failures, and device health trends. Such insights enable security teams to detect evolving threats, identify policy gaps, and take corrective action quickly. This also supports compliance with global regulations that require detailed oversight, such as GDPR, ISO standards, and industry-specific mandates.

The integration offered by Microsoft Entra ID makes this solution highly scalable. Organizations with thousands of users across multiple regions can implement consistent security policies through a unified control plane. This is particularly valuable for multinational enterprises with complex IT landscapes. Whether applications are hosted on-premises, in Azure, or in third-party cloud environments, Conditional Access policies ensure cohesive and predictable enforcement. This reduces the operational burden on IT teams, strengthens overall governance, and maintains consistent protection even as the organization grows.

Option B, traditional Active Directory password policies, is not adequate for modern security needs. Password policies can enforce complexity, rotation, and lockout thresholds, but none of these measures address the most prevalent threats seen today. Attackers routinely bypass password-only controls using phishing, credential stuffing, social engineering, and token theft. Password policies cannot assess the device used during login, the user’s typical behavior patterns, or the contextual risk of the session. They cannot detect a legitimate credential being used from an unusual location. They cannot stop an attacker using stolen credentials on an unmanaged device. They cannot dynamically respond to suspicious events. Because password-based controls do not provide adaptive or risk-based protection, organizations relying solely on this method face significant exposure. This approach also does not scale well in cloud environments, where users expect seamless access across multiple applications and platforms.

Option C, VPN access restricted to corporate networks, remains limited because it operates primarily at the network level. VPNs were designed to provide encrypted tunnels for remote workers accessing internal resources. However, VPNs assume that once a user is inside the network perimeter, they can be trusted. This assumption is dangerous in today’s environment, where compromised credentials are common and attackers often exploit VPN connections to move laterally inside corporate networks. VPNs do not evaluate user identity signals, analyze device compliance, or detect behavior anomalies. They do not automatically require additional authentication during risky situations. A VPN user with stolen credentials can often access sensitive resources simply by logging in—even if they are on a compromised device. Additionally, VPNs introduce performance limitations, create bottlenecks, and require complex configuration. They do not integrate well with cloud applications, and many modern SaaS platforms operate outside the corporate network model entirely.

Option D, local accounts with manual provisioning, is the least secure and least scalable option. Manual creation and removal of accounts often leads to inconsistencies, human errors, and security oversights. Accounts may remain active long after users leave the organization, creating unnecessary exposure. Local accounts also typically lack strong authentication controls and do not support centralized risk-based enforcement. There is no automated way to determine whether the person attempting access is legitimate or whether the device is secure. Manual provisioning severely limits auditability and cannot meet compliance requirements that demand detailed logs and traceable administrative actions. Additionally, as organizations expand, managing local accounts becomes unmanageable and error-prone. The absence of centralized monitoring, automation, adaptive policies, and device validation leaves the environment highly vulnerable.

Identity Protection adds an intelligence-driven dimension by correlating sign-in patterns with global threat signals. It uses risk scoring algorithms derived from millions of daily authentication logs, enabling it to detect anomalies that humans may never recognize manually. For example, if an attacker tries to log in from a location that does not align with the user’s normal behavior, or if credentials appear on the dark web, Identity Protection identifies these conditions immediately. By integrating this intelligence directly with Conditional Access, organizations are not just detecting anomalies but actively mitigating them with automated controls. This level of automation is crucial, as attackers increasingly use automated tools themselves, operating at speeds far beyond human response capabilities.

Device compliance further strengthens the zero-trust architecture by ensuring devices are not merely recognized but verified. A trusted user logging in from an untrusted or compromised device poses a major risk. Cyberattacks frequently spread through outdated software, weak endpoint configurations, or malware-infected devices. Device compliance ensures that security baselines are met before granting access, meaning even if credentials are valid, the device must also meet the organization’s minimum protection requirements. This dual validation of identity and device prevents attackers from bypassing protections through remote tools, rogue devices, or unmanaged personal endpoints.

Microsoft SC-100 Cybersecurity Architect Exam Dumps and Practice Test Questions Set 8 Q106-120

Related posts: