CompTIA CAS-005 CompTIA SecurityX Exam Dumps and Practice Test Questions Set 7 Q91-105
Visit here for our full CompTIA CAS-005 exam dumps and practice test questions.
Question 91
A company wants to ensure that sensitive data on employee laptops is protected if the devices are lost or stolen. Which solution provides the strongest protection?
A) Relying on employee vigilance to secure devices
B) Implementing full-disk encryption with strong authentication
C) Trusting employees to avoid storing sensitive data on laptops
D) Disabling encryption to improve device performance
Answer: B)
Explanation:
Employee laptops often contain sensitive corporate data, including intellectual property, client information, and credentials. If a device is lost or stolen, unauthorized individuals can gain access to this data, leading to breaches, regulatory penalties, and reputational damage. Relying solely on employee vigilance is inconsistent. Even careful users may forget laptops in public spaces, leave devices unattended, or inadvertently expose information. Human error cannot provide consistent, enforceable protection against device loss or theft.
Trusting employees to avoid storing sensitive data on laptops is impractical. Laptops are used for productivity, work from home, and travel, and sensitive information is frequently required for daily operations. Relying on employees to avoid storing critical data introduces significant risk, as users may unknowingly save confidential files locally or transfer them to unprotected locations.
Disabling encryption to improve device performance removes a key security layer. While encryption can introduce slight overhead, modern systems are optimized for full-disk encryption, and the minor performance impact is far outweighed by the protection it provides. Unencrypted laptops are vulnerable to attackers who can physically access storage media and extract sensitive information without restriction.
Implementing full-disk encryption with strong authentication provides the strongest protection. Full-disk encryption renders all data unreadable without the proper credentials, protecting information even if the physical device is compromised. Strong authentication, including complex passwords, hardware tokens, or biometrics, ensures that only authorized users can decrypt the data. Encryption protects the operating system, user files, and temporary storage, safeguarding the entire device. Centralized management can enforce encryption policies, monitor compliance, and provide recovery mechanisms for lost credentials. Full-disk encryption also supports regulatory compliance, particularly for personally identifiable information, financial data, and intellectual property. This layered approach ensures that even in the event of device loss or theft, sensitive information remains secure and inaccessible to unauthorized parties. By integrating encryption with strong authentication and policy enforcement, organizations achieve a proactive and scalable security solution that balances protection with usability and operational efficiency.
The reasoning shows that full-disk encryption with strong authentication is the most effective method for protecting sensitive laptop data. Reliance on employee vigilance, avoidance of storing sensitive files, or disabling encryption introduces substantial risk and fails to provide enforceable security.
Question 92
A company wants to ensure secure remote email access for employees using personal devices. Which solution provides the strongest protection without limiting productivity?
A) Allowing access without authentication
B) Implementing secure email gateways with multi-factor authentication and device compliance checks
C) Trusting users to avoid phishing attacks
D) Disabling email access on personal devices
Answer: B)
Explanation:
Remote email access is essential for productivity but exposes sensitive communications to interception, unauthorized access, and phishing attacks. Allowing access without authentication is highly risky. Anyone who obtains credentials or gains access to an unprotected connection could read, modify, or exfiltrate sensitive emails. This approach prioritizes convenience but introduces substantial security vulnerabilities.
Trusting users to avoid phishing attacks is insufficient. Even well-trained employees can fall victim to sophisticated phishing campaigns, social engineering, or credential harvesting attacks. Reliance on human behavior alone cannot enforce security policies, detect suspicious activity, or prevent unauthorized access, leaving corporate email accounts vulnerable.
Disabling email access on personal devices prevents remote exposure but significantly reduces productivity. Many employees rely on personal devices for communication, collaboration, and timely response to business needs. Blocking access entirely forces employees to find alternative workarounds, which may circumvent corporate controls and introduce additional risk.
Implementing secure email gateways with multi-factor authentication and device compliance checks provides the strongest protection. Secure email gateways filter incoming and outgoing messages for malware, spam, and phishing links, preventing many threats before they reach the user. Multi-factor authentication ensures that even if credentials are compromised, unauthorized access is blocked unless the second factor is presented. Device compliance checks enforce security policies on personal devices, verifying encryption, OS updates, and endpoint protection before granting access. Conditional access can restrict high-risk devices or locations, further reducing exposure. Centralized monitoring and logging provide visibility into access attempts, policy violations, and anomalous behavior. This layered approach balances security and productivity by allowing employees to securely access email from personal devices while mitigating the risk of credential theft, phishing, and unauthorized access.
The reasoning demonstrates that combining secure email gateways, MFA, and device compliance is a proactive, enforceable, and scalable solution. Allowing unrestricted access, relying on user vigilance, or disabling access either exposes sensitive data or disrupts business operations.
Question 93
A company wants to secure sensitive data shared through collaboration platforms. Which solution provides the most effective protection while maintaining usability?
A) Allowing unrestricted file sharing
B) Implementing Data Loss Prevention (DLP) integrated with collaboration tools
C) Trusting employees to handle files responsibly
D) Disabling collaboration features to prevent risk
Answer: B)
Explanation:
Collaboration platforms are widely used for document sharing, team communication, and project management. While convenient, these platforms pose significant risks if sensitive data is shared without control. Allowing unrestricted file sharing exposes intellectual property, financial data, and personal information to accidental leaks or malicious insiders. Unauthorized recipients may access, download, or distribute confidential files, resulting in breaches and regulatory violations.
Trusting employees to handle files responsibly is inconsistent. Even diligent employees may make mistakes, overlook sensitive content, or bypass policies. Reliance on human behavior alone cannot enforce security standards or provide auditability, leaving gaps in protection.
Disabling collaboration features prevents exposure but significantly reduces productivity. Modern workplaces rely on collaborative platforms for efficient teamwork, and restricting functionality forces employees to seek alternative methods, which may be less secure or unmonitored, inadvertently increasing risk.
Implementing Data Loss Prevention integrated with collaboration tools provides the most effective protection. DLP solutions identify, classify, and monitor sensitive content based on predefined policies. Automated controls can block unauthorized sharing, encrypt files, or alert administrators when violations occur. Integration with collaboration platforms ensures real-time monitoring of documents, chat messages, and file transfers, preventing accidental or intentional exfiltration. Alerts and reporting provide visibility into policy violations, user behavior, and potential risks. Conditional controls allow flexibility, permitting legitimate sharing while enforcing protection for sensitive information. By combining content inspection, policy enforcement, and monitoring, DLP reduces the likelihood of data breaches while supporting operational efficiency and usability. This layered approach ensures sensitive data remains protected in collaborative environments without unnecessarily restricting legitimate workflows.
The reasoning shows that DLP integrated with collaboration tools provides a proactive, enforceable, and scalable solution. Unrestricted sharing, reliance on user judgment, or disabling collaboration features either exposes sensitive data or disrupts business operations.
Question 94
A company wants to secure endpoints against ransomware attacks. Which solution provides the most comprehensive protection without disrupting productivity?
A) Allowing users to bypass security controls
B) Implementing endpoint detection and response (EDR), application whitelisting, and regular backups
C) Trusting employees not to open suspicious files
D) Disabling security software to improve performance
Answer: B)
Explanation:
Ransomware can encrypt critical files, disrupt operations, and demand ransom payments. Allowing users to bypass security controls is extremely risky. Users may inadvertently execute malicious files or download malware-laden applications, resulting in widespread encryption, operational downtime, and data loss. This approach prioritizes convenience over security and exposes endpoints to severe threats.
Trusting employees not to open suspicious files is unreliable. Human error is common, and even well-trained employees may fall for phishing campaigns, malicious downloads, or social engineering tactics. Relying solely on user vigilance does not prevent ransomware infections or protect critical systems.
Disabling security software to improve performance removes essential protection. Endpoint security tools detect, prevent, and respond to ransomware and other malware threats. Disabling these controls may improve performance marginally but leaves devices completely unprotected, significantly increasing the risk of infection.
Implementing endpoint detection and response, application whitelisting, and regular backups provides the most comprehensive protection. EDR continuously monitors endpoints for suspicious activity, identifies potential ransomware behavior, and enables rapid containment and remediation. Application whitelisting restricts execution to approved software, preventing unauthorized or malicious applications from running. Regular offline backups ensure that encrypted or compromised files can be restored without paying ransom, maintaining business continuity. Layered controls provide proactive prevention, detection, and recovery mechanisms while minimizing user disruption. Alerts, logging, and centralized management allow administrators to monitor events, enforce policies, and respond quickly to incidents. This approach balances security and productivity by ensuring endpoints are protected against ransomware while allowing employees to work efficiently without unnecessary restrictions.
The reasoning demonstrates that combining EDR, application whitelisting, and regular backups provides a proactive, enforceable, and scalable solution. Allowing bypass, relying on user behavior, or disabling security software introduces substantial risk.
Question 95
A company wants to protect its web servers from Distributed Denial-of-Service (DDoS) attacks. Which solution provides the most effective mitigation without disrupting legitimate traffic?
A) Allowing unrestricted traffic
B) Implementing DDoS mitigation services with traffic filtering and rate limiting
C) Trusting users not to launch attacks
D) Disabling firewalls to improve server performance
Answer: B)
Explanation:
Web servers are prime targets for DDoS attacks, which overwhelm resources, disrupt services, and prevent legitimate users from accessing applications. Allowing unrestricted traffic is highly risky. Attackers can flood servers with massive volumes of requests, causing outages, financial loss, and reputational damage. Without controls, DDoS attacks can scale quickly, making recovery challenging.
Trusting users not to launch attacks is unreliable. Malicious actors may exploit vulnerabilities, use botnets, or target servers anonymously. Human trust alone cannot prevent volumetric attacks, and relying on it provides no technical mitigation.
Disabling firewalls to improve performance removes critical protective layers. Firewalls enforce traffic filtering, block malicious requests, and protect servers from unauthorized access. Removing them leaves servers vulnerable to attacks, compromising availability and resilience.
Implementing DDoS mitigation services with traffic filtering and rate limiting provides the most effective protection. DDoS mitigation solutions analyze incoming traffic, distinguish between legitimate users and attack patterns, and filter malicious requests in real time. Rate limiting controls the number of requests per IP or session, preventing overload while preserving access for legitimate users. Cloud-based mitigation services provide scalability, absorbing high-volume attacks without impacting local infrastructure. Alerts and monitoring allow administrators to detect anomalies and respond to potential threats promptly. Traffic inspection, anomaly detection, and automated response ensure that servers remain available, responsive, and secure under attack. By combining proactive mitigation, monitoring, and automated enforcement, organizations maintain operational continuity while effectively reducing the impact of DDoS attacks.
The reasoning demonstrates that DDoS mitigation services with traffic filtering and rate limiting create a proactive, enforceable, and scalable solution. Unrestricted traffic, reliance on user trust, or disabled firewalls leave servers vulnerable and jeopardize availability.
Question 96
A company wants to prevent unauthorized access to sensitive files stored on shared network drives. Which solution provides the most effective protection?
A) Allowing all users full access to all files
B) Implementing role-based access control (RBAC), file encryption, and auditing
C) Trusting users to manage access responsibly
D) Disabling auditing to improve performance
Answer: B)
Explanation:
Shared network drives often contain sensitive files, such as financial records, intellectual property, or confidential client information. Allowing all users full access is extremely risky. Any user, intentional insider, or compromised account could read, modify, or delete critical files. This approach violates the principle of least privilege, maximizes the attack surface, and exposes sensitive information to unauthorized personnel.
Trusting users to manage access responsibly is unreliable. Human behavior is inconsistent, and even well-trained employees may share credentials, create unsecured files, or inadvertently expose sensitive data. Reliance solely on trust provides no enforceable controls and lacks accountability or auditing.
Disabling auditing to improve performance removes visibility and accountability. Without auditing, administrators cannot monitor access attempts, investigate incidents, or provide compliance reporting. Security gaps remain undetected, making it difficult to identify unauthorized access or misuse.
Implementing role-based access control, file encryption, and auditing provides the most effective protection. RBAC enforces the principle of least privilege, allowing access only to authorized users based on their role. File encryption ensures that sensitive data remains unreadable without the proper decryption keys, protecting files even if unauthorized access occurs. Auditing records all access attempts, modifications, and deletions, providing traceability and supporting forensic investigations. Centralized management allows administrators to enforce consistent access policies, detect anomalies, and quickly respond to unauthorized activities. Encryption, combined with access control and auditing, protects confidentiality, integrity, and accountability while maintaining usability for legitimate users. This layered approach reduces insider threat risk, supports regulatory compliance, and ensures sensitive information is secured even in complex environments with multiple users and shared resources.
The reasoning demonstrates that RBAC with encryption and auditing is a proactive, enforceable, and scalable solution. Unrestricted access, reliance on user behavior, or disabled auditing introduces substantial risk and cannot reliably protect sensitive files.
Question 97
A company wants to secure its mobile devices against malware and unauthorized access. Which solution provides the most effective protection while supporting employee mobility?
A) Allowing devices without restrictions
B) Implementing mobile device management (MDM) with encryption, remote wipe, and application controls
C) Trusting employees not to install malicious apps
D) Disabling security controls to improve performance
Answer: B)
Explanation:
Mobile devices, such as smartphones and tablets, store sensitive corporate data and access email, applications, and cloud resources. Allowing devices without restrictions exposes the organization to malware, phishing, and unauthorized access. Unrestricted devices may run malicious applications, connect to unsafe networks, or become compromised, leading to data breaches or operational disruption.
Trusting employees not to install malicious apps is unreliable. Even careful users may inadvertently download malware-laden applications or fall victim to social engineering campaigns. Human behavior cannot be consistently relied upon to prevent mobile threats, leaving sensitive information exposed.
Disabling security controls to improve performance removes critical protections. Without encryption, remote management, and security policies, mobile devices are highly vulnerable to data loss, theft, or compromise. Performance gains do not justify the heightened risk to corporate data and operational continuity.
Implementing mobile device management with encryption, remote wipe, and application controls provides the most effective protection. MDM solutions enforce security policies across all managed devices, ensuring compliance with organizational standards. Device encryption protects data at rest, preventing unauthorized access if a device is lost or stolen. Remote wipe enables administrators to erase sensitive information from compromised or lost devices quickly, mitigating potential data breaches. Application controls restrict the installation of unauthorized apps, reducing exposure to malware or insecure software. MDM also supports secure configurations for email, VPN, Wi-Fi, and network access, enforcing least privilege and reducing attack surfaces. Centralized management provides visibility into device compliance, security events, and potential threats, allowing rapid response and proactive remediation. By integrating encryption, application controls, and remote management, MDM balances security with mobility, enabling employees to work efficiently while protecting corporate assets.
The reasoning demonstrates that MDM with encryption, remote wipe, and application controls is proactive, enforceable, and scalable. Allowing unrestricted devices, relying solely on user judgment, or disabling controls exposes mobile endpoints to significant risk.
Question 98
A company wants to prevent unauthorized network access from compromised IoT devices. Which solution provides the most effective protection without disrupting operations?
A) Allowing IoT devices unrestricted access
B) Implementing network segmentation, access control lists (ACLs), and device monitoring
C) Trusting employees to secure IoT devices
D) Disabling network security controls for IoT to improve connectivity
Answer: B)
Explanation:
IoT devices, including smart sensors, cameras, and industrial equipment, are often vulnerable due to limited built-in security. Allowing IoT devices unrestricted access exposes the network to malware, lateral movement, and data exfiltration. Compromised IoT devices can serve as entry points for attackers, bypass traditional defenses, and threaten critical infrastructure.
Trusting employees to secure IoT devices is unreliable. Human error, lack of expertise, or oversight can result in insecure configurations, default credentials, or unpatched vulnerabilities. Reliance on user diligence alone is insufficient to protect critical network segments.
Disabling network security controls to improve connectivity removes essential safeguards. Without segmentation, access controls, or monitoring, compromised IoT devices can interact freely with sensitive systems, escalating risk and increasing attack surface.
Implementing network segmentation, access control lists, and device monitoring provides the most effective protection. Segmentation isolates IoT devices from critical networks, limiting the potential impact of compromise. ACLs enforce rules that permit only authorized communication, restricting access to necessary services and resources. Continuous monitoring tracks device behavior, network traffic, and security events, detecting anomalies indicative of compromise or unauthorized activity. Alerts enable rapid response to suspicious behavior, containing threats before they propagate. Network segmentation can also support virtual LANs (VLANs) and software-defined networking (SDN) for scalable isolation, while device monitoring integrates with centralized security platforms for policy enforcement and incident response. This layered approach ensures that IoT devices can operate efficiently while minimizing exposure to compromise, safeguarding enterprise networks without disrupting business operations.
The reasoning demonstrates that network segmentation, ACLs, and device monitoring provide proactive, enforceable, and scalable protection for IoT environments. Unrestricted access, reliance on employees, or disabled security controls introduces significant operational and security risks.
Question 99
A company wants to protect its critical systems from zero-day exploits. Which solution provides the most comprehensive defense while maintaining operational efficiency?
A) Relying solely on signature-based antivirus
B) Implementing endpoint detection and response (EDR) with threat intelligence and behavior analysis
C) Trusting users not to download malicious files
D) Disabling updates to avoid downtime
Answer: B)
Explanation:
Zero-day exploits target vulnerabilities that are unknown or unpatched, posing significant threats to critical systems. Relying solely on signature-based antivirus is inadequate because signatures are reactive and only protect against known threats. Zero-day malware can bypass signature-based detection, execute undetected, and compromise sensitive systems.
Trusting users not to download malicious files is unreliable. Even well-trained employees may be tricked by phishing, social engineering, or malicious websites. Reliance on user behavior cannot proactively prevent zero-day exploitation, leaving critical assets exposed.
Disabling updates to avoid downtime removes critical protections. Unpatched systems are prime targets for zero-day attacks, and disabling updates increases exposure, leaving systems vulnerable and unprotected.
Implementing endpoint detection and response with threat intelligence and behavior analysis provides the most comprehensive defense. EDR continuously monitors endpoints for anomalous behavior, suspicious processes, and signs of compromise, enabling proactive detection of zero-day attacks. Threat intelligence feeds inform security systems about emerging vulnerabilities, malware campaigns, and attack techniques. Behavior analysis detects deviations from normal system or user activity, flagging potential exploits even if signature-based detection fails. Automated alerts, containment mechanisms, and response workflows allow administrators to mitigate attacks rapidly while minimizing operational disruption. Integration with patch management ensures timely remediation of known vulnerabilities, complementing zero-day defenses. Centralized monitoring and analytics enable visibility across the enterprise, providing situational awareness and supporting incident response and compliance. This layered, proactive approach reduces exposure to unknown threats while maintaining operational efficiency, ensuring critical systems remain secure and available.
The reasoning shows that EDR with threat intelligence and behavior analysis is proactive, enforceable, and scalable for zero-day protection. Signature-only antivirus, reliance on user judgment, or disabled updates are insufficient and leave critical systems exposed.
Question 100
A company wants to prevent unauthorized modifications to critical system configurations. Which solution provides the strongest protection while supporting operational efficiency?
A) Allowing users to modify configurations without restrictions
B) Implementing configuration management, change control, and monitoring
C) Trusting administrators to avoid errors
D) Disabling monitoring to simplify management
Answer: B)
Explanation:
Critical system configurations, including network devices, servers, and databases, are essential to maintaining security, availability, and performance. Allowing unrestricted modifications is extremely risky. Unauthorized or accidental changes can introduce vulnerabilities, disrupt services, or degrade performance. This practice maximizes exposure to insider threats, misconfigurations, and operational errors.
Trusting administrators to avoid errors is unreliable. Even experienced personnel can make mistakes, overlook changes, or misconfigure systems. Reliance solely on human diligence cannot enforce policy, provide audit trails, or prevent accidental or malicious modifications.
Disabling monitoring to simplify management removes visibility into configuration changes. Without monitoring, administrators cannot detect unauthorized modifications, misconfigurations, or policy violations, increasing the risk of breaches, downtime, or compliance failures.
Implementing configuration management, change control, and monitoring provides the strongest protection. Configuration management maintains a baseline of approved system settings, ensuring that all critical devices adhere to security policies. Change control enforces formal processes for requesting, approving, and implementing modifications, reducing errors and unauthorized changes. Continuous monitoring tracks deviations from approved configurations, alerting administrators to anomalies and enabling rapid remediation. Automated tools can enforce compliance, detect drift, and maintain versioned backups of configurations for recovery. Centralized dashboards provide visibility, reporting, and audit trails for compliance, accountability, and incident response. This layered approach enforces policy, reduces risk of misconfiguration, prevents unauthorized modifications, and ensures operational efficiency. By combining configuration management, change control, and monitoring, organizations maintain system integrity, minimize downtime, and support secure operations.
The reasoning demonstrates that configuration management, change control, and monitoring is proactive, enforceable, and scalable. Unrestricted modifications, reliance on human diligence, or disabled monitoring introduce significant risk and fail to maintain system integrity.
Question 101
A company wants to detect and respond to advanced persistent threats (APTs) targeting its network. Which solution provides the most effective protection without impacting normal operations?
A) Relying solely on antivirus software
B) Implementing a Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) system with threat intelligence and endpoint detection
C) Trusting employees to recognize attacks
D) Disabling logging to improve network performance
Answer: B)
Explanation:
Advanced persistent threats are sophisticated, long-term cyberattacks designed to infiltrate networks stealthily, gather intelligence, and remain undetected for extended periods. Relying solely on antivirus software is inadequate because antivirus is signature-based and reactive. APTs often use zero-day exploits, fileless malware, or custom attack techniques that bypass traditional detection methods. Antivirus alone cannot provide visibility into lateral movement, privilege escalation, or exfiltration attempts.
Trusting employees to recognize attacks is unreliable. While security awareness training helps, human detection is inconsistent and cannot match the capabilities of automated, centralized monitoring. Even well-trained personnel may miss subtle indicators of APT activity, particularly when attackers use legitimate credentials or normal-looking network activity to mask malicious actions.
Disabling logging to improve network performance removes a critical capability for detecting anomalies. Without logs, administrators lack visibility into user activity, system events, or network traffic, making it impossible to identify or investigate ongoing attacks. The temporary performance improvement is outweighed by the inability to detect or respond to threats effectively.
Implementing a SIEM system with threat intelligence and endpoint detection provides the most effective protection. SIEM aggregates logs from multiple sources, including network devices, servers, applications, and endpoints, correlates events, and identifies suspicious patterns indicative of APT activity. Integration with threat intelligence enables the SIEM to recognize known indicators of compromise, attack signatures, and emerging threat vectors. Endpoint detection and response (EDR) complements SIEM by monitoring individual devices for anomalous behavior, process execution, and unauthorized access attempts. Together, these tools provide a holistic view of the security posture, enabling rapid detection, analysis, and response to threats. SIEM alerts administrators to high-risk activity, supports forensic investigations, and enables proactive defense measures, such as isolating compromised systems or blocking malicious connections. Centralized dashboards provide real-time visibility and reporting, helping organizations meet compliance requirements while maintaining operational efficiency. This layered, proactive approach ensures that advanced threats are detected and mitigated before significant damage occurs, without disrupting legitimate business operations.
The reasoning demonstrates that a SIEM with threat intelligence and EDR is proactive, enforceable, and scalable. Antivirus alone, reliance on human detection, or disabled logging leaves networks highly vulnerable to advanced persistent threats.
Question 102
A company wants to ensure that sensitive data stored in cloud applications is protected from unauthorized access and leaks. Which solution provides the most comprehensive protection?
A) Allowing unrestricted access to cloud applications
B) Implementing Cloud Access Security Broker (CASB) with encryption, access control, and Data Loss Prevention (DLP)
C) Trusting employees to use cloud applications responsibly
D) Disabling cloud applications to prevent risk
Answer: B)
Explanation:
Cloud applications are increasingly used for collaboration, storage, and business processes. Allowing unrestricted access exposes sensitive data to unauthorized users, accidental leaks, and compromised accounts. Attackers can exploit weak authentication, insider errors, or misconfigured cloud permissions, leading to breaches, regulatory violations, and reputational damage.
Trusting employees to use cloud applications responsibly is inconsistent. Even well-intentioned staff may make mistakes, such as sharing sensitive files publicly or using insecure applications. Human behavior alone cannot enforce corporate security policies, monitor compliance, or provide audit trails.
Disabling cloud applications entirely reduces risk but severely impacts productivity. Many business operations rely on cloud services for collaboration, remote access, and workflow efficiency. Blocking cloud applications may lead employees to use unsanctioned services, increasing exposure to unmonitored risks.
Implementing a Cloud Access Security Broker with encryption, access control, and Data Loss Prevention provides the most comprehensive protection. CASB solutions offer visibility into cloud usage, detect unsanctioned applications, and enforce security policies. Encryption ensures that sensitive data remains protected in transit and at rest, even if storage systems are compromised. Access controls, including role-based permissions, conditional access, and authentication requirements, enforce the principle of least privilege. DLP policies identify sensitive content and prevent unauthorized sharing, downloading, or exfiltration. Alerts and monitoring provide insight into user activity, potential risks, and policy violations. Integration with centralized management supports auditing, compliance reporting, and automated enforcement. By combining visibility, encryption, access control, and DLP, CASB solutions protect data against insider threats, external attacks, and accidental leaks while maintaining usability and productivity.
The reasoning demonstrates that CASB with encryption, access control, and DLP provides a proactive, enforceable, and scalable solution. Unrestricted access, reliance on user diligence, or disabling cloud services either expose sensitive information or hinder operations.
Question 103
A company wants to prevent phishing attacks from compromising employee credentials. Which solution provides the most effective protection?
A) Relying solely on employee awareness training
B) Implementing secure email gateways with link scanning, attachment sandboxing, and anti-phishing features
C) Trusting employees not to click on suspicious links
D) Disabling email scanning to improve performance
Answer: B)
Explanation:
Phishing attacks are a primary method for attackers to steal credentials, deliver malware, and gain unauthorized access. Relying solely on employee awareness training is insufficient because human error is inevitable. Even well-trained users can fall for sophisticated or targeted phishing campaigns, particularly spear-phishing attacks that exploit trust or insider knowledge. Training is important for cultivating security culture but cannot replace technical safeguards.
Trusting employees not to click on suspicious links is unreliable. Users may misinterpret warnings, bypass guidelines, or inadvertently engage with malicious content. This approach provides no technical enforcement, leaving critical credentials vulnerable to theft.
Disabling email scanning to improve performance removes a critical defensive layer. Email is the primary delivery mechanism for phishing attacks, and scanning is essential to detect malicious attachments, links, and spoofed messages. Eliminating scanning increases the likelihood of successful attacks and downstream compromise of systems or credentials.
Implementing secure email gateways with link scanning, attachment sandboxing, and anti-phishing features provides the most effective protection. Email gateways inspect inbound messages, detect and block malicious URLs, and execute attachments in isolated environments to identify threats before delivery. Advanced heuristics, machine learning, and threat intelligence feeds enhance detection of novel and evolving phishing attacks. Alerts provide feedback to users and administrators, reinforcing safe behavior and enabling rapid incident response. Centralized logging allows investigation of attacks, policy enforcement, and compliance reporting. By combining automated scanning, threat analysis, and user awareness, email gateways significantly reduce the likelihood of credential compromise while maintaining usability and productivity. This proactive, enforceable, and layered approach addresses both known and unknown threats, reducing the risk of phishing-related breaches.
The reasoning demonstrates that secure email gateways with link scanning, attachment sandboxing, and anti-phishing features provide a proactive, enforceable, and scalable solution. Reliance solely on training, user trust, or disabled scanning introduces significant risk.
Question 104
A company wants to ensure secure remote access for employees while minimizing the risk of credential compromise. Which solution provides the strongest protection?
A) Allowing VPN access without authentication
B) Implementing VPN with multi-factor authentication (MFA) and device compliance checks
C) Trusting employees not to share credentials
D) Disabling remote access to prevent risk
Answer: B)
Explanation:
Remote access is essential for modern business operations but introduces risks of unauthorized access, credential theft, and data compromise. Allowing VPN access without authentication is highly risky. Anyone who obtains credentials can access internal systems, potentially compromising sensitive resources. Lack of verification leaves networks vulnerable to attack.
Relying solely on employees to safeguard their credentials is an unreliable and inconsistent approach to securing systems and sensitive data. Even diligent and security-conscious employees are prone to mistakes, misjudgments, or inadvertent actions that can compromise account security. For example, employees may inadvertently share passwords through insecure channels such as email, messaging platforms, or shared documents. They may also fall victim to social engineering attacks, phishing campaigns, or pretexting schemes, which can trick even the most careful users into disclosing authentication information. In addition, employees sometimes store credentials insecurely, such as on sticky notes, spreadsheets, or unsecured password managers, further increasing the risk of unauthorized access. Because human behavior is inherently unpredictable, relying solely on employees to follow security best practices cannot guarantee that sensitive systems and data will remain protected. Policies and training alone cannot enforce compliance or prevent malicious actors from exploiting compromised credentials, leaving critical assets exposed.
On the other hand, disabling remote access entirely may reduce the risk of credential theft or unauthorized entry, but it comes with significant operational drawbacks. Modern organizations increasingly rely on remote access to maintain business continuity, enable collaboration, and support flexible work arrangements. Blocking remote access forces employees to seek alternative methods to complete their tasks, which may include unapproved or unsecured solutions such as personal devices, third-party file-sharing services, or shadow IT applications. These workarounds can introduce new vulnerabilities, increase the attack surface, and create gaps in visibility and control for IT security teams. In addition, restricting remote access can reduce productivity, hinder responsiveness, and create friction in workflows, potentially impacting the organization’s overall performance and competitiveness. While eliminating remote access might appear to improve security superficially, it does not address the underlying need for controlled and monitored access, and it can unintentionally encourage behaviors that further compromise security.
The optimal approach balances security and usability by combining technical controls with appropriate policies. Multi-factor authentication (MFA), hardware-backed credentials, and secure identity management solutions can ensure that even if passwords are disclosed, attackers cannot gain unauthorized access. Privileged access management, role-based access controls, and endpoint security measures further restrict the potential damage from compromised credentials. Secure remote access solutions, such as virtual private networks (VPNs) or zero-trust network architectures, allow employees to work remotely safely without exposing sensitive systems to unnecessary risk. By implementing enforceable technical safeguards rather than relying solely on human compliance, organizations can protect credentials and sensitive resources while maintaining operational flexibility and productivity.
Trusting employees not to share credentials is insufficient because human error, social engineering, and insecure storage can all lead to compromise. At the same time, completely disabling remote access hinders productivity and may encourage insecure workarounds. A balanced strategy that enforces strong authentication, secure remote access, and technical controls provides robust protection while supporting modern work practices, reducing both the risk of unauthorized access and the operational drawbacks of overly restrictive policies.
Implementing VPN with multi-factor authentication and device compliance checks provides the strongest protection. MFA ensures that even if credentials are compromised, attackers cannot gain access without the secondary factor, such as OTPs, biometrics, or hardware tokens. Device compliance checks verify that endpoints meet security requirements, including encryption, patching, and endpoint protection, before granting access. VPN encryption secures data in transit, preventing interception and man-in-the-middle attacks. Conditional access policies block high-risk devices or locations, enforcing least privilege. Centralized monitoring provides visibility into access attempts, policy violations, and anomalous activity. Alerts support rapid incident response, containment, and remediation. This layered approach balances security and operational efficiency, allowing legitimate users to connect safely while significantly reducing the likelihood of compromise.
The reasoning demonstrates that VPN with MFA and device compliance is proactive, enforceable, and scalable. Unrestricted access, reliance on user judgment, or disabling access exposes systems to risk or disrupts business operations.
Question 105
A company wants to ensure secure software deployment across its environment to prevent vulnerabilities. Which solution provides the most effective approach?
A) Allowing users to manually install updates
B) Implementing automated patch management with centralized monitoring and policy enforcement
C) Trusting employees to install patches timely manner
D) Disabling updates to avoid compatibility issues
Answer: B)
Explanation:
Software vulnerabilities are a primary target for attackers seeking to exploit systems. Allowing users to manually install updates is unreliable. Users may delay patches, install them inconsistently, or fail to apply critical security fixes. This approach does not scale and cannot guarantee protection across a large environment.
Relying solely on employees to install software patches promptly is an inconsistent and unreliable approach to maintaining security. Human behavior is inherently unpredictable, and even employees who are generally conscientious about security may delay installing updates for a variety of reasons. Some may postpone updates due to workload pressures, perceiving the process as inconvenient or time-consuming, while others may avoid updates because they fear potential disruptions to system functionality or compatibility with critical applications. Misunderstandings about the importance of updates or the nature of the vulnerabilities being addressed can also contribute to delays. This variability in human behavior introduces significant risk, as endpoints remain exposed to known security flaws until updates are applied. Attackers are often quick to exploit vulnerabilities that have already been publicly disclosed, meaning even a short delay can be sufficient for compromise. Relying on user compliance alone, therefore, leaves endpoints unprotected and undermines the organization’s overall security posture.
Disabling updates entirely to avoid potential compatibility issues is an even more dangerous practice. While it may seem convenient to prevent interruptions to workflows or to maintain the stability of critical software, this approach leaves systems vulnerable to known exploits. Outdated software often contains security weaknesses that attackers can target to gain unauthorized access, exfiltrate sensitive data, install malware, or disrupt operations. In many cases, threat actors actively scan for unpatched systems, making unpatched endpoints easy targets. The decision to prioritize convenience over security exposes the organization to a wide range of risks, including data breaches, ransomware attacks, and operational downtime. By avoiding updates, organizations are effectively ignoring one of the most fundamental aspects of cybersecurity—keeping software current and protected against known threats.
The combination of trusting employees to manage updates and intentionally disabling updates creates a particularly high-risk environment. Human inconsistency can result in delayed patching, while disabling updates entirely removes a critical protective layer. This dual approach amplifies exposure to attacks and reduces the organization’s ability to respond proactively to emerging threats. Cybersecurity best practices emphasize the need for automated, centrally managed patching processes that minimize reliance on individual behavior and ensure that all systems receive timely updates. Automated patch management allows organizations to enforce updates consistently, reducing the window of vulnerability and preventing attackers from exploiting known weaknesses. It also allows IT teams to test updates in controlled environments to address compatibility concerns while maintaining security.
Relying on employees to apply patches and disabling updates to avoid compatibility issues both create substantial security risks. Human behavior is inconsistent, and systems left unpatched are vulnerable to exploitation. Effective cybersecurity requires automated, managed patching processes that ensure updates are applied promptly, balancing security with operational stability and reducing the likelihood of compromise.
Implementing automated patch management with centralized monitoring and policy enforcement provides the most effective approach. Automated systems ensure consistent deployment of updates across all devices, including operating systems, applications, and security software. Centralized dashboards provide visibility into patch status, failures, and compliance levels, enabling rapid remediation. Policies can prioritize critical updates, schedule deployment during off-peak hours, and roll back failed installations. Integration with vulnerability management ensures alignment between patches and discovered risks. Logging and auditing provide accountability, compliance reporting, and support incident response. By automating patch deployment, monitoring, and enforcement, organizations reduce administrative burden, maintain operational efficiency, and protect endpoints from exploitation. This layered approach ensures consistent, proactive, and scalable protection while supporting business continuity.
The reasoning demonstrates that automated patch management with centralized monitoring and enforcement is proactive, enforceable, and scalable. Manual updates, reliance on user compliance, or disabled updates leave systems exposed to critical vulnerabilities.