CompTIA CAS-005 CompTIA SecurityX Exam Dumps and Practice Test Questions Set 13 Q181-195
Visit here for our full CompTIA CAS-005 exam dumps and practice test questions.
Question 181
A company wants to ensure that endpoints accessing sensitive corporate resources are not compromised by malware, ransomware, or unauthorized modifications. Which solution provides the most effective protection while maintaining usability?
A) Allowing endpoints to connect without any security controls
B) Implementing Endpoint Protection Platforms (EPP) with anti-malware, ransomware protection, and real-time monitoring
C) Trusting employees to secure their endpoints themselves
D) Disabling endpoint access entirely
Answer: B)
Explanation:
Endpoints are primary attack surfaces in modern organizations, providing a gateway for malware, ransomware, and other malicious activity to infiltrate corporate networks. Allowing endpoints to connect without any security controls is extremely risky. Attackers can exploit unpatched software, misconfigured settings, or unmonitored behaviors to install malware, exfiltrate sensitive data, or create persistent footholds. Without protection, endpoints can serve as both targets and vectors, spreading threats across networks and critical systems. This approach lacks enforceable policies, real-time detection, or remediation capabilities, leaving organizations vulnerable to breaches and compliance failures.
Trusting employees to secure their endpoints themselves is insufficient. Even knowledgeable personnel may fail to maintain consistent patching, misconfigure security settings, or inadvertently download malicious files. Human behavior is inconsistent, and reliance solely on personal vigilance cannot provide comprehensive protection, particularly when endpoints operate outside controlled networks or in remote locations. Moreover, attacks often exploit sophisticated techniques such as fileless malware, zero-day vulnerabilities, or social engineering, which may bypass manual protective measures.
Disabling endpoint access entirely prevents exposure but is impractical. Employees rely on endpoints for work functions, collaboration, communication, and access to corporate applications. Blocking access disrupts productivity, workflow, and operational efficiency, potentially prompting unsafe workarounds such as unauthorized personal devices or shadow IT, which increase risk even further.
Implementing Endpoint Protection Platforms with anti-malware, ransomware protection, and real-time monitoring provides the most effective protection. EPP solutions combine signature-based detection with heuristic and behavioral analysis to identify known and unknown threats. Anti-malware modules prevent the execution of malicious code, while ransomware protection monitors for abnormal file encryption patterns and can automatically block suspicious activities. Real-time monitoring continuously evaluates system behavior, allowing rapid detection and response to potential compromises. Integration with centralized management, threat intelligence feeds, and Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) systems enables administrators to enforce policies, monitor compliance, and respond proactively to incidents. Logging and reporting support auditing, regulatory compliance, and forensic investigations. This layered approach balances security and usability, allowing endpoints to perform operational tasks while being actively protected against malware and unauthorized modifications. Endpoint Protection Platforms with these capabilities are proactive, enforceable, and scalable, providing robust protection without disrupting business operations.
The reasoning demonstrates that Endpoint Protection Platforms with anti-malware, ransomware protection, and real-time monitoring provide comprehensive, proactive protection. Uncontrolled access, reliance on employee diligence, or disabling endpoints either exposes systems or hinders workflow and operational efficiency.
Question 182
A company wants to ensure secure access to its cloud applications from unmanaged devices without exposing sensitive data. Which solution provides the most effective protection while maintaining usability?
A) Allowing any device to access cloud applications without verification
B) Implementing Cloud Access Security Broker (CASB) with device posture assessment, encryption, and policy enforcement
C) Trusting employees to maintain security on personal devices
D) Disabling access from unmanaged devices entirely
Answer: B)
Explanation:
Cloud applications enable productivity, collaboration, and remote work, but introduce risks when accessed from unmanaged or personal devices. Allowing any device to access cloud applications without verification is highly risky. Unauthorized or compromised devices may bypass controls, exfiltrate sensitive data, or spread malware. Without enforcement, organizations cannot ensure the security of corporate information, leaving them exposed to breaches, regulatory non-compliance, and potential operational disruption.
Trusting employees to maintain security on personal devices is insufficient. Human behavior is unpredictable, and employees may fail to install necessary updates, configure devices securely, or follow security best practices. Even well-intentioned personnel can inadvertently introduce risks, and sophisticated threats can bypass user-level security measures. Reliance on employees alone provides no guarantee that corporate data remains secure, particularly in scenarios involving sensitive information or critical cloud applications.
Disabling access from unmanaged devices entirely prevents risk but is impractical. Modern workforces require flexibility to work from various locations using personal devices, especially for remote, mobile, or hybrid work models. Blocking all unmanaged devices would disrupt workflow, reduce productivity, and may prompt unsafe alternatives, such as shadow IT, which could circumvent controls and increase risk.
Implementing a Cloud Access Security Broker with device posture assessment, encryption, and policy enforcement provides the most effective protection. CASB solutions monitor device compliance in real time, assessing security posture factors such as OS version, patching status, encryption, and antivirus presence. Policy enforcement ensures that only devices meeting organizational requirements can access cloud applications, while encryption protects sensitive data in transit and at rest. Integration with identity management, single sign-on, and multi-factor authentication enhances security by verifying user identity alongside device posture. CASB logging and monitoring enable detection of anomalous activity, auditing, and automated policy remediation. This layered approach balances security and usability, allowing secure access from unmanaged devices while protecting corporate data. CASB solutions are proactive, enforceable, and scalable, providing comprehensive cloud access security without hindering workflow or productivity.
The reasoning demonstrates that CASB with device posture assessment, encryption, and policy enforcement provides comprehensive, proactive protection. Unrestricted access, reliance on employee diligence, or blocking unmanaged devices either exposes corporate data or disrupts operational efficiency.
Question 183
A company wants to ensure that its employees can securely collaborate on sensitive documents without risking accidental or intentional data leakage. Which solution provides the most effective protection while maintaining usability?
A) Allowing unrestricted file sharing via email or collaboration tools
B) Implementing Data Loss Prevention (DLP) integrated with collaboration platforms, encryption, and access control
C) Trusting employees not to share sensitive information improperly
D) Disabling collaboration tools entirely
Answer: B)
Explanation:
Collaboration tools such as messaging apps, file-sharing platforms, and project management solutions improve productivity but pose risks of data leakage. Allowing unrestricted file sharing is highly risky. Employees may inadvertently send sensitive files to unauthorized recipients, misconfigure sharing settings, or use insecure channels. Such actions can result in exposure of proprietary information, personal data, or intellectual property, potentially causing regulatory violations, reputational damage, and operational impact.
Trusting employees not to share sensitive information improperly is insufficient. Even well-trained employees can make mistakes, fail to recognize sensitive content, or bypass policies due to convenience. Human behavior is inconsistent, and reliance solely on employee vigilance cannot reliably prevent data leaks or enforce organizational standards.
Disabling collaboration tools entirely prevents exposure but is impractical. Organizations rely on these tools for communication, project management, and document sharing. Blocking access would reduce productivity, hinder workflow, and may prompt employees to use unapproved or insecure alternatives, increasing overall risk.
Implementing Data Loss Prevention integrated with collaboration platforms, encryption, and access control provides the most effective protection. DLP solutions analyze file content, metadata, and user behavior to enforce policies preventing sensitive data from leaving the organization or being shared with unauthorized parties. Encryption ensures that any transferred or stored data remains secure even if intercepted or improperly accessed. Access controls apply role-based restrictions, ensuring that only authorized individuals can view, edit, or share sensitive documents. Integration with monitoring and alerting systems provides visibility into policy violations, supports incident response, and allows administrators to take immediate corrective actions. This layered approach balances security and usability, allowing employees to collaborate effectively while protecting sensitive information. DLP with encryption and access control is proactive, enforceable, and scalable, providing robust protection without disrupting business processes.
The reasoning demonstrates that Data Loss Prevention integrated with collaboration platforms, encryption, and access control provides comprehensive, proactive protection. Unrestricted sharing, reliance on employee diligence, or disabling collaboration tools either exposes sensitive data or disrupts workflow.
Question 184
A company wants to ensure that all web traffic is inspected for threats while minimizing latency and disruption to users. Which solution provides the most effective protection while maintaining usability?
A) Allowing all web traffic without inspection
B) Implementing a Secure Web Gateway (SWG) with content inspection, threat intelligence, and URL filtering
C) Trusting employees to avoid malicious websites
D) Disabling internet access entirely
Answer: B)
Explanation:
Web traffic is a primary vector for malware, phishing, ransomware, and data exfiltration. Allowing all web traffic without inspection is highly risky. Users may inadvertently visit malicious websites, download infected files, or be exposed to drive-by attacks. Without inspection, malicious content can enter the network unnoticed, compromising endpoints, applications, and sensitive data.
Trusting employees to avoid malicious websites is insufficient. Even trained personnel may misidentify threats, fall for social engineering attacks, or click on compromised links. Human behavior cannot provide consistent, real-time protection against sophisticated threats. Relying solely on employee vigilance leaves the network vulnerable to malware, data theft, and ransomware.
Disabling internet access prevents exposure but is impractical. Organizations depend on web connectivity for business operations, research, communication, collaboration, and cloud services. Blocking access disrupts productivity and may force employees to find workarounds, potentially bypassing security controls and increasing risk.
Implementing a Secure Web Gateway with content inspection, threat intelligence, and URL filtering provides the most effective protection. SWGs inspect web traffic in real time, analyzing files, scripts, and URLs for malicious content, malware, or command-and-control communications. Threat intelligence feeds enable the identification of known malicious domains, files, and patterns. URL filtering enforces acceptable use policies, preventing access to unauthorized or high-risk websites. Integration with logging, monitoring, and alerting systems allows administrators to detect anomalies, enforce compliance, and respond to threats immediately. SWGs can optimize performance using caching, SSL inspection, and policy-based traffic management, minimizing latency and maintaining usability for legitimate web access. This layered approach balances security and efficiency, ensuring users can access the web safely without disrupting operations. SWG with content inspection, threat intelligence, and URL filtering is proactive, enforceable, and scalable, providing comprehensive protection while maintaining user experience.
The reasoning demonstrates that a Secure Web Gateway with content inspection, threat intelligence, and URL filtering provides comprehensive, proactive protection. Uninspected traffic, reliance on employee behavior, or disabling internet access either exposes the organization to threats or disrupts workflow.
Question 185
A company wants to prevent unauthorized devices from connecting to its network while maintaining operational efficiency. Which solution provides the most effective protection while maintaining usability?
A) Allowing any device to connect without verification
B) Implementing Network Access Control (NAC) with device authentication, posture assessment, and policy enforcement
C) Trusting employees to secure devices before connecting
D) Disabling network connectivity entirely
Answer: B)
Explanation:
Network access by unauthorized devices is a major security risk, as it can facilitate malware propagation, data exfiltration, and lateral movement. Allowing any device to connect without verification is highly risky. Unmanaged, compromised, or rogue devices can bypass traditional perimeter controls and introduce significant threats to sensitive systems and data. This approach lacks accountability, monitoring, and enforcement, leaving networks exposed.
Trusting employees to secure devices before connecting is insufficient. Human error or negligence can result in devices being unpatched, misconfigured, or compromised, introducing vulnerabilities that attackers can exploit. Relying solely on user diligence cannot enforce security policies or prevent unauthorized access effectively.
Disabling network connectivity entirely prevents exposure but is impractical. Organizations rely on network connectivity for applications, collaboration, communication, and operations. Blocking access would severely disrupt productivity and operational efficiency, forcing users to find alternative solutions, potentially compromising security further.
Implementing Network Access Control with device authentication, posture assessment, and policy enforcement provides the most effective protection. NAC solutions authenticate devices and users before granting access, ensuring that only authorized, compliant devices can connect. Posture assessment evaluates device health, including patch levels, antivirus status, encryption, and configuration compliance. Policy enforcement dynamically restricts or grants network access based on compliance results, preventing unauthorized or insecure devices from connecting. Integration with monitoring, logging, and threat detection systems enables continuous oversight, alerts for anomalies, and rapid incident response. This layered approach balances security and usability, allowing operational efficiency while preventing unauthorized access. NAC with authentication, posture assessment, and policy enforcement is proactive, enforceable, and scalable, providing comprehensive network security without disrupting workflow.
The reasoning demonstrates that Network Access Control with device authentication, posture assessment, and policy enforcement provides comprehensive, proactive protection. Unrestricted access, reliance on employee vigilance, or disabling network connectivity either exposes the organization to threats or disrupts operations.
Question 186
A company wants to ensure that sensitive corporate data stored on portable devices is protected in case of loss or theft. Which solution provides the most effective protection while maintaining usability?
A) Allowing data to be stored on portable devices without encryption
B) Implementing full-disk encryption with secure key management and remote wipe capability
C) Trusting employees to safeguard portable devices
D) Disabling the use of portable devices entirely
Answer: B)
Explanation:
Portable devices such as laptops, USB drives, and external hard drives often contain sensitive corporate data. Allowing data to be stored on these devices without encryption is extremely risky. In the event of loss or theft, attackers could gain immediate access to all stored data, including intellectual property, personal information, or financial records. Unencrypted devices provide no barrier to unauthorized access, making breaches almost certain if devices fall into the wrong hands. This approach fails to meet regulatory standards, leaving organizations exposed to fines, legal action, and reputational harm.
Trusting employees to safeguard portable devices is insufficient. Even responsible personnel can misplace devices, have them stolen, or fail to follow security best practices. Human behavior is unpredictable, and relying solely on employees to maintain security is not scalable or enforceable. Sophisticated attackers often exploit human errors or weak device security to bypass protections.
Disabling portable devices entirely prevents risk but is impractical. Organizations rely on these devices for work flexibility, data transfer, remote access, and operational tasks. Blocking their use disrupts workflow, reduces productivity, and may push employees to adopt shadow IT solutions that bypass security controls, increasing risk.
Implementing full-disk encryption with secure key management and remote wipe capability provides the most effective protection. Full-disk encryption ensures that all data on the device remains unreadable without proper decryption, protecting confidentiality even if the device is physically compromised. Secure key management safeguards encryption keys from unauthorized access and ensures that only authorized users can unlock the device. Remote wipe capability allows administrators to delete sensitive data if a device is lost, stolen, or reported compromised, minimizing exposure. Integration with endpoint management systems enables enforcement of encryption policies, compliance tracking, and monitoring of device health. Logging and auditing provide accountability, regulatory compliance, and forensic evidence if incidents occur. This layered approach balances security and usability, allowing employees to use portable devices effectively while maintaining strict data protection. Full-disk encryption with key management and remote wipe is proactive, enforceable, and scalable, providing robust protection without disrupting workflow.
The reasoning demonstrates that full-disk encryption with secure key management and remote wipe capability provides comprehensive, proactive protection. Unencrypted storage, reliance on employee vigilance, or disabling devices either exposes sensitive data or hinders operational functionality.
Question 187
A company wants to prevent unauthorized applications from executing on endpoints while maintaining operational efficiency. Which solution provides the most effective protection while maintaining usability?
A) Allowing all applications to run without restriction
B) Implementing application whitelisting with endpoint management, monitoring, and automated policy enforcement
C) Trusting employees to install only approved software
D) Disabling software installation entirely
Answer: B)
Explanation:
Endpoints are a frequent target for malware, ransomware, and other malicious software. Allowing all applications to run without restriction is extremely risky. Malicious, vulnerable, or unauthorized software could execute, compromising sensitive data, spreading malware, or creating network vulnerabilities. This approach lacks enforceable controls, monitoring, or remediation capabilities, leaving endpoints exposed to attacks and operational disruptions.
Trusting employees to install only approved software is insufficient. Human behavior is inconsistent, and even well-trained personnel may install unsafe applications, ignore policies, or bypass restrictions. Reliance solely on employee vigilance cannot scale across large organizations or prevent sophisticated threats, including fileless malware, zero-day exploits, or social engineering attacks.
Disabling software installation entirely prevents risk but is impractical. Users need to install approved applications, updates, and tools to perform operational tasks. Blocking all installations would hinder productivity, reduce efficiency, and potentially lead to unsafe workarounds, such as unauthorized devices or software.
Implementing application whitelisting with endpoint management, monitoring, and automated policy enforcement provides the most effective protection. Application whitelisting ensures that only pre-approved software can execute, preventing unauthorized or malicious applications from running. Endpoint management allows administrators to enforce installation policies, distribute software securely, and maintain compliance. Continuous monitoring tracks execution attempts, logs incidents, and triggers alerts for policy violations. Automated enforcement ensures that only compliant software operates on endpoints, reducing administrative overhead and minimizing human error. Integration with security monitoring, threat intelligence, and incident response systems enables rapid detection and remediation of threats. This layered approach balances security and usability, allowing legitimate applications to run while blocking unauthorized software. Application whitelisting with management and monitoring is proactive, enforceable, and scalable, providing robust protection without disrupting operational workflows.
The reasoning demonstrates that application whitelisting with endpoint management, monitoring, and automated enforcement provides comprehensive, proactive protection. Unrestricted application execution, reliance on employee diligence, or disabling installation either exposes endpoints to risk or disrupts productivity.
Question 188
A company wants to ensure secure remote access to its internal network for employees while protecting sensitive resources. Which solution provides the most effective protection while maintaining usability?
A) Allowing VPN access without authentication
B) Implementing VPN with multi-factor authentication, endpoint compliance checks, and logging
C) Trusting employees to secure their own devices
D) Disabling remote access entirely
Answer: B)
Explanation:
Remote access allows employees to work from various locations but introduces risks such as unauthorized access, compromised devices, and data breaches. Allowing VPN access without authentication is highly risky. Attackers could exploit stolen credentials, compromised devices, or unmonitored access to infiltrate the network. Lack of identity verification and compliance checks leaves internal resources vulnerable and reduces accountability.
Trusting employees to secure their own devices is insufficient. Even responsible personnel may fail to apply security patches, misconfigure settings, or inadvertently introduce vulnerabilities. Human behavior is inconsistent, and relying solely on employees cannot enforce security policies or prevent compromise.
Disabling remote access entirely prevents risk but is impractical. Employees need remote access for productivity, collaboration, and operational tasks. Blocking access reduces workflow efficiency and may encourage unsafe alternatives, such as unsanctioned remote tools or shadow IT, increasing overall risk.
Implementing VPN with multi-factor authentication, endpoint compliance checks, and logging provides the most effective protection. VPN establishes an encrypted channel between remote devices and the corporate network, preventing interception or eavesdropping. Multi-factor authentication verifies user identity through multiple methods, mitigating the risk of credential compromise. Endpoint compliance checks ensure devices meet security requirements, such as up-to-date patches, antivirus software, and encryption, before granting access. Logging and monitoring provide visibility into remote access activity, support auditing, and enable incident response. Integration with centralized management systems allows administrators to enforce policies consistently, detect anomalies, and respond proactively to threats. This layered approach balances security and usability, providing secure remote access while minimizing the risk of unauthorized access or compromised devices. VPN with MFA, compliance checks, and logging is proactive, enforceable, and scalable, protecting sensitive resources without disrupting workflow.
The reasoning demonstrates that a VPN with multi-factor authentication, endpoint compliance checks, and logging provides comprehensive, proactive protection. Unauthenticated VPN access, reliance on employee vigilance, or disabling remote access either exposes resources or disrupts productivity.
Question 189
A company wants to protect sensitive internal web applications from unauthorized access while enabling seamless authentication for users. Which solution provides the most effective protection while maintaining usability?
A) Allowing unrestricted access to all employees
B) Implementing Single Sign-On (SSO) with multi-factor authentication and role-based access control
C) Trusting employees not to share credentials
D) Disabling internal web applications entirely
Answer: B)
Explanation:
Internal web applications often handle sensitive corporate data, making access control critical. Allowing unrestricted access is highly risky. Unauthorized users could access, modify, or exfiltrate information, undermining confidentiality, integrity, and compliance efforts. Lack of controls eliminates accountability, auditing, and enforcement, leaving systems exposed to internal and external threats.
Trusting employees not to share credentials is insufficient. Even well-trained personnel may inadvertently share passwords, fall victim to phishing, or reuse credentials across platforms. Human behavior cannot reliably enforce security policies or prevent unauthorized access, particularly in hybrid or remote work environments.
Disabling internal web applications entirely prevents risk but is impractical. Organizations rely on applications for collaboration, reporting, and operational processes. Blocking access disrupts workflow, reduces productivity, and may encourage employees to adopt unsafe workarounds or shadow IT, increasing exposure.
Implementing Single Sign-On with multi-factor authentication and role-based access control provides the most effective protection. SSO centralizes authentication, simplifying user access while enabling consistent security policy enforcement. Multi-factor authentication verifies user identity using multiple verification methods, reducing the risk of compromised credentials. Role-based access control ensures users can only access resources necessary for their roles, adhering to the principle of least privilege. Integration with logging, monitoring, and auditing systems enables administrators to track access, detect anomalies, and respond to incidents proactively. This layered approach balances security and usability, providing seamless authentication for users while protecting sensitive applications. SSO with MFA and RBAC is proactive, enforceable, and scalable, maintaining security without disrupting operational efficiency.
The reasoning demonstrates that Single Sign-On with multi-factor authentication and role-based access control provides comprehensive, proactive protection. Unrestricted access, reliance on employee vigilance, or disabling applications either exposes sensitive resources or disrupts workflow.
Question 190
A company wants to ensure that sensitive data stored in databases is protected from unauthorized access, tampering, and exfiltration. Which solution provides the most effective protection while maintaining usability?
A) Allowing all users unrestricted database access
B) Implementing database encryption, access controls, activity monitoring, and auditing
C) Trusting database administrators to manually manage access
D) Disabling databases entirely
Answer: B)
Explanation:
Databases often contain the most critical corporate information, including financial records, customer data, intellectual property, and operational data. Allowing all users unrestricted database access is extremely risky. Any user could read, modify, or delete sensitive data, compromising confidentiality, integrity, and availability. Without enforcement, monitoring, and auditing, organizations cannot detect or respond to unauthorized actions, increasing the likelihood of breaches and regulatory non-compliance.
Trusting database administrators to manually manage access is insufficient. Even experienced administrators can make mistakes, misconfigure permissions, or fail to detect suspicious activity. Human oversight alone cannot scale to complex database environments or defend against sophisticated attacks, including insider threats, SQL injection, or privilege escalation.
Disabling databases entirely prevents risk but is impractical. Databases are critical for applications, reporting, decision-making, and operational processes. Blocking access would disrupt workflow, hinder business operations, and reduce productivity, making this approach unfeasible.
Implementing database encryption, access controls, activity monitoring, and auditing provides the most effective protection. Encryption ensures that sensitive data is unreadable without proper authorization, protecting confidentiality even if storage is compromised. Access controls enforce the principle of least privilege, limiting users and applications to the minimum necessary access. Activity monitoring detects unusual queries, privilege escalation attempts, and data exfiltration, enabling rapid response to threats. Auditing provides detailed logs of access and modifications, supporting compliance, forensics, and accountability. Integration with SIEM and security monitoring systems enables real-time alerts, automated responses, and centralized oversight. This layered approach balances security and usability, allowing authorized users to access databases while protecting sensitive information. Database encryption, access controls, activity monitoring, and auditing are proactive, enforceable, and scalable, providing robust protection without disrupting operations.
The reasoning demonstrates that database encryption, access controls, activity monitoring, and auditing provide comprehensive, proactive protection. Unrestricted access, reliance on manual oversight, or disabling databases either exposes sensitive data or disrupts operational functionality.
Question 191
A company wants to ensure that employees cannot access sensitive files from unauthorized devices while maintaining operational efficiency. Which solution provides the most effective protection while maintaining usability?
A) Allowing access from any device without verification
B) Implementing conditional access with device compliance checks, encryption, and policy enforcement
C) Trusting employees to secure their devices before accessing files
D) Disabling remote file access entirely
Answer: B)
Explanation:
Remote access to sensitive files is essential for modern workplaces, supporting productivity, collaboration, and operational flexibility. Allowing access from any device without verification is highly risky. Unauthorized or compromised devices can bypass traditional controls, access sensitive data, exfiltrate information, or introduce malware into the corporate environment. Lack of centralized enforcement and monitoring leaves critical data vulnerable, increasing the likelihood of breaches, regulatory violations, and operational impact.
Trusting employees to secure their devices before accessing files is insufficient. Even diligent personnel may neglect updates, misconfigure security settings, or unknowingly expose credentials. Human behavior is inconsistent, and reliance on employees alone cannot enforce organizational security policies or prevent sophisticated threats, particularly in hybrid and remote work environments.
Disabling remote file access entirely prevents risk but is impractical. Employees require access to work files from remote or mobile locations to maintain productivity. Blocking access disrupts workflows, reduces operational efficiency, and may push users toward insecure alternatives or shadow IT, increasing overall risk exposure.
Implementing conditional access with device compliance checks, encryption, and policy enforcement provides the most effective protection. Conditional access verifies the user’s identity and assesses the security posture of the accessing device, checking factors such as patch levels, antivirus presence, encryption, and configuration compliance. Encryption ensures that files remain protected in transit and at rest, mitigating the risk of interception or unauthorized access. Policy enforcement dynamically grants, restricts, or blocks access based on device compliance and user context, ensuring that sensitive files are only accessible to authorized and secure devices. Integration with logging, monitoring, and alerting systems allows administrators to detect anomalous behavior, track file access, and respond proactively to potential threats. This layered approach balances security and usability, enabling employees to access files securely without disrupting workflows. Conditional access with compliance checks, encryption, and policy enforcement is proactive, enforceable, and scalable, providing robust protection while maintaining operational efficiency.
The reasoning demonstrates that conditional access with device compliance checks, encryption, and policy enforcement provides comprehensive, proactive protection. Unrestricted device access, reliance on employee diligence, or disabling remote access either exposes sensitive data or hinders operational productivity.
Question 192
A company wants to prevent phishing attacks from compromising employee credentials while minimizing disruption to email workflows. Which solution provides the most effective protection while maintaining usability?
A) Allowing all emails without filtering
B) Implementing an email security gateway with phishing detection, URL analysis, and user education
C) Trusting employees not to click on malicious links
D) Disabling email communication entirely
Answer: B)
Explanation:
Email is a primary vector for phishing attacks, which can compromise credentials, enable malware delivery, or facilitate unauthorized access. Allowing all emails without filtering is highly risky. Users may receive malicious links, attachments, or socially engineered messages designed to trick them into revealing sensitive information. Lack of inspection leaves endpoints and corporate systems vulnerable, increasing the likelihood of breaches, ransomware infections, and data exfiltration.
Trusting employees not to click on malicious links is insufficient. Even trained personnel may make mistakes, overlook suspicious indicators, or fall victim to sophisticated phishing techniques such as spear phishing or social engineering attacks. Human behavior is inconsistent, and reliance solely on user vigilance cannot reliably prevent credential compromise or unauthorized access.
Disabling email communication entirely prevents exposure but is impractical. Email is essential for business operations, collaboration, and communication. Blocking email would disrupt workflows, reduce productivity, and may prompt employees to use insecure communication channels, increasing overall risk.
Implementing an email security gateway with phishing detection, URL analysis, and user education provides the most effective protection. Email security gateways inspect incoming messages for known malicious indicators, suspicious attachments, and abnormal content patterns. URL analysis evaluates links in real time, detecting potential phishing sites before the user interacts with them. Integration with threat intelligence feeds ensures continuous updates against emerging phishing campaigns. User education programs train employees to recognize and report suspicious messages, reinforcing technological defenses with human awareness. Logging and monitoring provide visibility into attempted attacks, support incident response, and allow administrators to refine policies proactively. This layered approach balances security and usability, allowing email communication to continue while significantly reducing the risk of phishing-based credential compromise. Email security gateways with phishing detection, URL analysis, and education are proactive, enforceable, and scalable, providing comprehensive protection without disrupting operational efficiency.
The reasoning demonstrates that an email security gateway with phishing detection, URL analysis, and user education provides comprehensive, proactive protection. Unfiltered emails, reliance solely on employee vigilance, or disabling email either exposes the organization to attacks or disrupts productivity.
Question 193
A company wants to ensure that sensitive data transmitted over networks is protected from interception while maintaining operational efficiency. Which solution provides the most effective protection while maintaining usability?
A) Allowing unencrypted communication across networks
B) Implementing end-to-end encryption with secure protocols and key management
C) Trusting network administrators to monitor traffic manually
D) Disabling network communication entirely
Answer: B)
Explanation:
Network communications are vulnerable to interception, eavesdropping, and man-in-the-middle attacks. Allowing unencrypted communication is extremely risky. Data transmitted in plaintext can be intercepted by attackers, exposing sensitive corporate information such as credentials, intellectual property, financial records, or personal information. Without encryption, even internal communications are susceptible to compromise, increasing the potential for breaches, regulatory violations, and operational disruption.
Trusting network administrators to monitor traffic manually is insufficient. Manual monitoring cannot scale to modern high-volume networks, detect sophisticated encryption bypass techniques, or provide real-time protection. Human oversight alone is inadequate for preventing unauthorized access to sensitive transmissions, especially in large or hybrid networks.
Disabling network communication entirely prevents risk but is impractical. Network connectivity is essential for applications, collaboration, remote work, and operational processes. Blocking communication would disrupt workflows, reduce efficiency, and potentially encourage unsafe workarounds, such as shadow IT, which increases exposure.
Implementing end-to-end encryption with secure protocols and key management provides the most effective protection. End-to-end encryption ensures that data is encrypted from the source to the destination, preventing interception or tampering during transmission. Secure protocols, such as TLS and IPsec, provide robust cryptographic standards for confidentiality, integrity, and authentication. Key management safeguards encryption keys, ensures proper distribution, prevents unauthorized access, and supports rotation policies for compliance and operational security. Integration with monitoring and logging systems allows administrators to detect anomalies, enforce compliance, and respond proactively to threats. End-to-end encryption provides a balance of security and usability, enabling secure communication without disrupting network operations. This layered approach is proactive, enforceable, and scalable, protecting sensitive data in transit while maintaining operational efficiency.
The reasoning demonstrates that end-to-end encryption with secure protocols and key management provides comprehensive, proactive protection. Unencrypted communication, reliance on manual monitoring, or disabling networks either exposes sensitive data or disrupts operations.
Question 194
A company wants to detect and respond to abnormal behavior on endpoints and network devices to prevent potential breaches. Which solution provides the most effective protection while maintaining usability?
A) Ignoring unusual behavior and relying on user vigilance
B) Implementing Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) with User and Entity Behavior Analytics (UEBA)
C) Trusting administrators to manually review logs occasionally
D) Disabling monitoring on endpoints and networks entirely
Answer: B)
Explanation:
Detecting abnormal behavior on endpoints and network devices is critical for preventing breaches, insider threats, malware spread, and data exfiltration. Ignoring unusual behavior is extremely risky. Threats can go unnoticed, allowing attackers to compromise sensitive systems, escalate privileges, or move laterally within the network. Without proactive detection, incidents are identified only after significant damage, delaying response and remediation.
Trusting administrators to manually review logs occasionally is insufficient. Manual inspection is time-consuming, inconsistent, and cannot scale to modern high-volume, complex networks. Human oversight may miss subtle indicators of compromise, such as anomalous login patterns, abnormal data access, or lateral movement. Reliance solely on manual processes leaves the organization exposed to sophisticated threats.
Disabling monitoring on endpoints and networks prevents risk detection but is impractical. Monitoring is essential for real-time visibility, proactive threat detection, and compliance reporting. Blocking monitoring eliminates critical visibility into operations, leaving security gaps unaddressed.
Implementing Security Information and Event Management with User and Entity Behavior Analytics provides the most effective protection. SIEM collects, aggregates, and correlates logs from endpoints, network devices, and applications, enabling real-time visibility into system activity. UEBA analyzes patterns of behavior for users and devices, identifying anomalies such as unusual login locations, data access patterns, or device behavior. Integration with automated alerting, response, and incident management allows rapid containment and remediation of potential threats. Threat intelligence feeds enhance detection capabilities by providing insights into emerging attack methods. Logging, auditing, and reporting support compliance and forensic investigations. This layered approach balances security and usability, enabling normal operations while detecting and responding to abnormal behavior proactively. SIEM with UEBA is proactive, enforceable, and scalable, providing comprehensive protection without disrupting productivity.
The reasoning demonstrates that SIEM with UEBA provides comprehensive, proactive protection. Ignoring behavior, relying on manual log review, or disabling monitoring either exposes the organization or limits visibility into potential threats.
Question 195
A company wants to ensure that endpoints accessing the network are continuously assessed for compliance with security policies to prevent breaches. Which solution provides the most effective protection while maintaining usability?
A) Allowing all endpoints unrestricted network access
B) Implementing Continuous Endpoint Compliance Assessment with automated enforcement and reporting
C) Trusting employees to maintain endpoint security themselves
D) Disabling endpoint access entirely
Answer: B)
Explanation:
Endpoints are a primary vector for attacks and breaches, making continuous compliance assessment crucial. Allowing all endpoints unrestricted network access is highly risky. Unpatched, misconfigured, or compromised devices can introduce malware, exfiltrate data, or exploit vulnerabilities across the network. Without continuous assessment, breaches can go undetected, increasing operational, regulatory, and reputational risk.
Relying solely on employees to maintain endpoint security is an inherently insufficient approach for protecting organizational systems and data. While employees may be diligent and well-intentioned, human behavior is inconsistent and prone to error. Even the most conscientious personnel may fail to update or patch systems promptly, misconfigure security settings, or neglect endpoint protection measures due to workload pressures, misunderstandings, or simple oversight. These gaps leave endpoints exposed to a wide range of threats, including malware, ransomware, and exploits targeting known vulnerabilities. Attackers actively search for unpatched or misconfigured systems, and delays in securing endpoints can provide them with opportunities to gain unauthorized access, escalate privileges, and move laterally across the network.
Human-reliant endpoint management also struggles to scale in large or distributed environments. In organizations with hundreds or thousands of devices, expecting individual users to consistently apply updates, patches, and configurations is impractical. Differences in behavior, technical knowledge, and adherence to policy mean that endpoint security becomes inconsistent across the organization. This variability creates weak points that attackers can exploit, making human-driven processes an unreliable foundation for comprehensive security. Relying solely on employees also prevents enforceable compliance; there is no mechanism to guarantee that security policies are applied uniformly, and deviations may go unnoticed until they result in a breach.
Moreover, manual, human-based management cannot provide continuous monitoring or real-time visibility into endpoint security status. Automated systems are required to detect suspicious activity, unauthorized software installations, or configuration drift as it occurs. Without continuous oversight, endpoints remain vulnerable for extended periods, and attacks may go undetected until significant damage has occurred. Human efforts alone cannot match the speed, scale, and consistency of automated monitoring and enforcement tools.
To address these challenges, organizations must implement centralized, automated endpoint management solutions. Tools such as patch management systems, endpoint detection and response (EDR), and security configuration enforcement ensure that all devices receive timely updates, adhere to security policies, and are monitored for anomalous behavior. These systems reduce the likelihood of human error, provide enforceable compliance, and deliver continuous visibility across the organization, minimizing the attack surface and improving overall security posture.
Trusting employees to maintain endpoint security is insufficient because human behavior is inconsistent, error-prone, and cannot scale effectively. Without automated enforcement and monitoring, gaps in security leave endpoints vulnerable to attacks. A combination of centralized, automated endpoint management and human oversight provides consistent protection, enforceable compliance, and continuous monitoring, ensuring a stronger and more reliable security posture.
Disabling endpoint access entirely prevents exposure but is impractical. Employees need network access to perform operational tasks, collaborate, and access applications. Blocking access disrupts workflow, reduces productivity, and may prompt unsafe workarounds, increasing security risks.
Implementing Continuous Endpoint Compliance Assessment with automated enforcement and reporting provides the most effective protection. This solution continuously evaluates endpoints for patch status, antivirus, encryption, configuration compliance, and other security controls. Automated enforcement can quarantine or restrict non-compliant devices, ensuring that only secure endpoints connect to the network. Reporting provides visibility into compliance trends, supports auditing, and enables proactive remediation. Integration with endpoint management, SIEM, and policy enforcement systems ensures consistent, scalable, and real-time security oversight. This layered approach balances security and usability, allowing employees to work efficiently while protecting the network from threats introduced by non-compliant endpoints. Continuous Endpoint Compliance Assessment with automated enforcement is proactive, enforceable, and scalable, providing comprehensive protection without disrupting workflow.
The reasoning demonstrates that Continuous Endpoint Compliance Assessment with automated enforcement and reporting provides comprehensive, proactive protection. Unrestricted access, reliance on employee diligence, or disabling endpoints either exposes the network or disrupts productivity.