CompTIA CAS-005 CompTIA SecurityX Exam Dumps and Practice Test Questions Set 5 Q61-75

Visit here for our full CompTIA CAS-005 exam dumps and practice test questions.

Question 61

A company wants to detect unauthorized access attempts to critical servers in real time. Which control provides the most effective solution?

A) Reviewing logs manually once per month
B) Implementing a Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) system with real-time alerting
C) Relying on users to report suspicious activity
D) Disabling logging to improve server performance

Answer: B)

Explanation:

Detecting unauthorized access attempts to critical servers in real time requires continuous monitoring and correlation of events. Reviewing logs manually once per month is inadequate because attacks can occur in minutes or hours. By the time logs are manually reviewed, attackers may have already completed lateral movement, privilege escalation, or data exfiltration. Manual log review is labor-intensive, prone to human error, and cannot scale to environments with multiple servers generating thousands of events per day. While useful for periodic auditing, it fails as a primary defense mechanism.

Relying on users to report suspicious activity is unreliable. Users may not recognize malicious actions, overlook subtle signs of compromise, or fail to report promptly. Human observation is inconsistent and cannot guarantee the timely detection of attacks that occur outside of working hours or in complex systems where unauthorized access may be invisible without automated tools.

Disabling logging to improve performance removes a critical layer of security. Logging is essential for visibility into authentication attempts, privilege use, and system changes. Without logs, there is no historical record of activity, making investigation, remediation, or compliance impossible. Although performance gains may be achieved, the trade-off is severe, as the organization loses the ability to detect, investigate, and respond to unauthorized access.

Implementing a Security Information and Event Management system with real-time alerting provides the most effective solution. SIEM collects logs from multiple sources, normalizes the data, and correlates events to identify suspicious activity. Real-time alerts allow security teams to respond immediately to unauthorized access attempts, reducing dwell time and limiting the impact of potential breaches. SIEM can integrate with threat intelligence feeds to identify known attack patterns and anomalous behaviors. Automated response capabilities, such as blocking IP addresses, disabling accounts, or isolating systems, enhance protection and support incident response workflows. Additionally, SIEM provides centralized visibility, audit trails, and compliance reporting, which are critical for regulated environments. By combining automated correlation, real-time alerts, and actionable intelligence, organizations can proactively detect and respond to access attempts before they result in compromise, while manual log reviews or relying on users are reactive and incomplete approaches.

The reasoning emphasizes that continuous, automated, and intelligent monitoring with alerting is essential for detecting unauthorized access attempts effectively. Manual reviews, user reports, or disabled logging cannot provide timely, actionable insight, whereas SIEM ensures that security teams can detect and respond to threats proactively while maintaining compliance.

Question 62

An organization wants to reduce the risk of insider threats without impacting employee productivity. Which approach provides the most effective mitigation?

A) Granting all employees administrative access
B) Implementing role-based access control (RBAC), least privilege, and activity monitoring
C) Trusting employees to follow policies without enforcement
D) Disabling auditing to maintain performance

Answer: B)

Explanation:

Insider threats, whether malicious or accidental, are difficult to detect and can result in significant data breaches. Granting all employees administrative access maximizes risk. With unrestricted access, any compromised account or careless action can impact critical systems or sensitive data. Administrative privileges are powerful and should only be given to those who need them. Broad access contradicts the principle of least privilege and makes it nearly impossible to prevent unauthorized actions or investigate malicious behavior.

Trusting employees to follow policies without enforcement is insufficient. Users may unintentionally violate policies, ignore security guidelines, or act maliciously. Human behavior is unpredictable, and reliance solely on trust introduces significant risk. Policy compliance without enforcement lacks accountability and does not prevent unauthorized access or misuse of sensitive information.

Disabling auditing removes critical visibility into user activity. Without auditing, it is impossible to track access, changes, or attempts to exfiltrate data. Although disabling auditing may improve system performance, it removes essential accountability mechanisms, making it difficult to detect or investigate insider threats. The lack of traceability undermines the organization’s ability to identify malicious behavior or accidental violations.

Implementing role-based access control, least privilege, and activity monitoring provides the most effective mitigation. RBAC ensures that users only have access to the systems, applications, and data necessary for their role. Least privilege further limits permissions to the minimum required for specific tasks, reducing the potential impact of insider actions. Activity monitoring captures user behavior, logging access attempts, modifications, and unusual activity, providing real-time alerts for suspicious behavior. By combining these measures, organizations can prevent unauthorized access, detect anomalies, and respond promptly to potential threats without significantly impacting legitimate workflows. Integration with security information and event management solutions allows for analysis, trend detection, and compliance reporting. The combination of enforced access controls and monitoring enables proactive prevention and detection of insider threats, balancing security and productivity.

The reasoning demonstrates that RBAC, least privilege, and monitoring create layered controls that enforce limits on access, provide visibility into activity, and enable rapid response, whereas granting universal access, relying on trust, or disabling auditing increases risk and reduces accountability.

Question 63

A company wants to ensure that security patches are applied consistently across servers and endpoints. Which approach provides the most effective method?

A) Applying patches manually on each device
B) Using automated patch management tools integrated with testing and deployment policies
C) Relying solely on user notifications to update their systems
D) Disabling patching to avoid potential application conflicts

Answer: B)

Explanation:

Consistent application of security patches is essential to prevent exploitation of known vulnerabilities. Applying patches manually on each device is time-consuming, error-prone, and difficult to scale in environments with numerous servers and endpoints. Manual processes can result in delayed patching, inconsistent configurations, and missed updates, leaving systems exposed to attacks. Human error in manual patching can also introduce configuration issues or downtime.

Relying solely on user notifications to update their systems is unreliable. Users may ignore notifications, delay updates due to convenience, or fail to restart devices as needed. This approach cannot guarantee the timely or uniform application of patches, leaving endpoints vulnerable. Depending on user compliance is inconsistent and creates gaps in protection.

Disabling patching to avoid potential conflicts may improve system stability in the short term, but it significantly increases security risk. Unpatched systems are susceptible to exploitation, lateral movement, malware deployment, and data breaches. Avoiding patch management undermines the organization’s security posture and exposes critical infrastructure to known vulnerabilities.

Using automated patch management tools integrated with testing and deployment policies provides the most effective method. These tools enable administrators to deploy patches in a controlled and consistent manner across servers and endpoints. Testing policies ensure that updates do not disrupt critical applications or workflows. Automated deployment reduces human error, ensures compliance with organizational security standards, and accelerates patch application, reducing the window of vulnerability. Monitoring and reporting features provide visibility into patch status, allowing administrators to track compliance and remediate exceptions. Integration with configuration management and endpoint management solutions ensures consistency and supports auditing requirements. By automating patching while maintaining controlled testing and deployment processes, organizations achieve timely protection, minimize downtime, and maintain operational efficiency. This approach aligns with industry best practices for vulnerability management and continuous security improvement.

The reasoning emphasizes that automation with policy enforcement and monitoring ensures consistent, timely, and effective patch management, whereas manual application, user-dependent updates, or disabling patching introduce significant operational and security risks.

Question 64

A company wants to reduce the risk of malware spreading through email attachments. Which solution provides the most effective protection without disrupting productivity?

A) Allowing all email attachments without inspection
B) Implementing an advanced email gateway with attachment sandboxing, malware scanning, and policy enforcement
C) Disabling email scanning to improve performance
D) Relying on employees to manually verify attachments

Answer: B)

Explanation:

Email is a common vector for malware delivery. Allowing all email attachments without inspection creates a high-risk environment. Malicious attachments can contain ransomware, trojans, or scripts that execute on endpoints, spreading malware across the network. Unrestricted attachments expose the organization to compromise and data loss, particularly when sophisticated threats bypass traditional antivirus software.

Disabling email scanning removes a critical layer of defense. Without scanning, all attachments reach users directly, increasing exposure to malware and malicious payloads. Performance gains are minimal compared to the potential security impact of uninspected emails. This approach sacrifices security for convenience.

Relying on employees to manually verify attachments is unreliable. Users may lack technical knowledge, misjudge threats, or inadvertently open malicious files. Human error remains a leading cause of malware infection. Relying solely on users introduces inconsistencies, delays detection, and reduces overall security posture.

Implementing an advanced email gateway with attachment sandboxing, malware scanning, and policy enforcement provides the most effective protection. Sandboxing executes attachments in an isolated environment to detect malicious behavior before delivery. Malware scanning identifies known signatures, heuristics, and suspicious behavior. Policy enforcement can block specific file types, enforce attachment size limits, and quarantine suspicious content. The solution integrates threat intelligence feeds to detect emerging malware campaigns. Real-time monitoring and alerting provide visibility and support incident response. This layered approach ensures that legitimate business communication is maintained while preventing malware propagation. By automating inspection, analysis, and enforcement, organizations achieve proactive defense against email-based malware without significantly disrupting productivity.

The reasoning demonstrates that combining advanced scanning, sandboxing, and policy enforcement ensures proactive, scalable, and consistent protection, whereas uninspected attachments, disabled scanning, or reliance on human verification alone introduces significant risk.

Question 65

A company wants to secure its endpoints against zero-day threats. Which control provides the most comprehensive defense?

A) Relying solely on signature-based antivirus
B) Implementing endpoint detection and response (EDR) with behavioral analysis, threat intelligence, and automated response
C) Disabling endpoint protections to improve performance
D) Trusting users to avoid risky behavior

Answer: B)

Explanation:

Zero-day threats exploit unknown vulnerabilities and bypass traditional signature-based defenses. Relying solely on signature-based antivirus software is insufficient because signatures only protect against known malware. Zero-day exploits use previously unseen attack vectors, fileless malware, or legitimate system tools to evade detection. Signature-based antivirus software cannot proactively identify these threats, making it reactive and inadequate.

Disabling endpoint protections entirely removes any defense, leaving systems vulnerable to malware, ransomware, and exploits. Performance gains do not justify the loss of protection. Without endpoint security, attackers can gain access, execute malware, and compromise data without resistance.

Trusting users to avoid risky behavior is unreliable. Users may inadvertently click on malicious links, download infected files, or use unsafe applications. Human error cannot be consistently prevented and is a weak primary control against zero-day attacks.

Implementing endpoint detection and response with behavioral analysis, threat intelligence, and automated response provides the most comprehensive defense. EDR continuously monitors system behavior to identify anomalies, suspicious processes, or abnormal network activity. Behavioral analysis detects threats that do not match known signatures by identifying unusual activity patterns, privilege escalation attempts, or lateral movement. Threat intelligence integration provides real-time updates on emerging attack techniques, indicators of compromise, and malware campaigns. Automated response allows the system to contain threats immediately, such as isolating endpoints, terminating malicious processes, or quarantining suspicious files. Centralized reporting and visibility support incident investigation and compliance requirements. This approach provides proactive protection against known and unknown threats, enabling security teams to detect, respond, and mitigate zero-day attacks efficiently without relying solely on user vigilance.

The reasoning highlights that a combination of behavioral analysis, threat intelligence, and automated response through EDR provides proactive, intelligent, and comprehensive defense against zero-day threats, whereas signature-only antivirus, disabled protections, or user reliance is insufficient.

Question 66

A company wants to enforce consistent security settings across all endpoints while minimizing administrative effort. Which solution provides the most effective approach?

A) Manually configuring each endpoint
B) Using centralized endpoint management with policy enforcement
C) Allowing users to configure their own settings
D) Disabling endpoint controls to improve usability

Answer: B)

Explanation:

Ensuring consistent security settings across endpoints is critical to prevent vulnerabilities, misconfigurations, and unauthorized changes. Manually configuring each endpoint is labor-intensive, error-prone, and not scalable. In large environments with hundreds or thousands of devices, manual processes lead to inconsistencies, delays in updates, and an increased likelihood of human error. Even diligent administrators can miss configurations or fail to apply them uniformly, which exposes endpoints to potential compromise.

Allowing users to configure their own settings introduces variability and risk. Individual endpoints may lack essential security controls, leading to inconsistent protection and non-compliance with organizational policies. Users may disable security features, apply weak configurations, or install unauthorized software, increasing exposure to malware, insider threats, or external attacks. This approach undermines centralized security controls and creates challenges for monitoring and incident response.

Disabling endpoint controls entirely to improve usability removes critical protections. Without controls such as antivirus software, firewalls, or configuration enforcement, endpoints are vulnerable to compromise, unauthorized access, and malware infection. While users may experience fewer restrictions, the overall security posture is severely weakened, creating unacceptable risk to the organization.

Using centralized endpoint management with policy enforcement provides the most effective approach. Centralized management solutions, such as Microsoft Endpoint Manager, Jamf, or other enterprise mobility management (EMM) platforms, allow administrators to define security policies centrally and deploy them consistently across all endpoints. Policies can enforce password complexity, encryption, firewall rules, application restrictions, patch management, and device compliance requirements. Automated policy enforcement ensures endpoints maintain the desired state, reducing human error and administrative burden. Integration with reporting and monitoring provides visibility into compliance, enabling administrators to identify and remediate deviations proactively. Centralized control also supports scalability in large, dynamic environments, ensuring that new devices automatically inherit security policies without manual intervention. By combining automation, policy enforcement, and monitoring, organizations achieve consistent security across all endpoints while minimizing administrative effort and maintaining operational efficiency.

The reasoning demonstrates that centralized endpoint management with automated policy enforcement provides proactive, scalable, and reliable protection. Manual configuration, user-managed settings, or disabled controls cannot guarantee uniform security and introduce unnecessary risk, whereas centralized enforcement ensures compliance, consistency, and operational efficiency.

Question 67

A company wants to protect against ransomware while ensuring data recovery capabilities. Which solution provides the most comprehensive protection?

A) Relying solely on antivirus software
B) Implementing regular backups combined with endpoint protection, user training, and access controls
C) Disabling backups to reduce storage costs
D) Trusting users not to open suspicious emails or files

Answer: B)

Explanation:

Ransomware encrypts files and systems, often rendering critical data inaccessible. Relying solely on antivirus software is insufficient because modern ransomware frequently uses zero-day exploits, fileless techniques, or polymorphic variants to bypass signature-based detection. Antivirus alone cannot provide recovery capabilities or ensure business continuity in the event of a successful ransomware attack.

Disabling backups to reduce storage costs removes a critical safety net. If ransomware encrypts data and no backups exist, recovery may be impossible without paying the ransom. This exposes the organization to significant operational, financial, and reputational risks, as well as potential regulatory violations related to data loss or availability.

Trusting users not to open suspicious emails or files is unreliable. Human behavior is inherently inconsistent, and phishing emails or malicious links are designed to bypass awareness and manipulate users. Relying solely on employee vigilance does not provide technical mitigation or assurance that data will remain accessible after an attack.

Implementing regular backups combined with endpoint protection, user training, and access controls provides the most comprehensive protection. Regular backups ensure that data can be restored in the event of encryption or deletion by ransomware. Backups should be stored securely, isolated from endpoints, and tested periodically to confirm recoverability. Endpoint protection, including antivirus and EDR, helps detect and block ransomware activity before significant damage occurs. User training increases awareness of phishing attacks, suspicious attachments, and safe computing practices, reducing the likelihood of ransomware execution. Access controls enforce the principle of least privilege, preventing ransomware from propagating across systems or network shares. By integrating these layers, organizations create a resilient defense that minimizes risk, ensures rapid recovery, and maintains operational continuity. This strategy balances proactive prevention, detection, and recovery, providing comprehensive protection against ransomware while supporting usability and business operations.

The reasoning emphasizes that a layered approach combining backups, endpoint protection, training, and access control provides proactive defense and recovery capabilities. Antivirus alone, disabled backups, or reliance on user vigilance is insufficient for modern ransomware threats.

Question 68

A company wants to ensure secure remote access for employees while minimizing the risk of unauthorized connections. Which solution provides the most effective protection?

A) Allowing direct VPN connections from any device without authentication
B) Implementing multi-factor authentication (MFA) with device compliance checks and a VPN gateway
C) Trusting employees to use personal devices securely
D) Disabling remote access to improve network security

Answer: B)

Explanation:

Secure remote access is essential for protecting corporate resources when employees work outside the organization’s network. Allowing direct VPN connections from any device without authentication exposes the organization to significant risk. Any compromised device, stolen credentials, or unauthorized endpoint could access internal resources, bypassing security controls and enabling data exfiltration, malware propagation, or lateral movement.

Trusting employees to use personal devices securely is unreliable. Users may have outdated operating systems, lack endpoint protection, or unknowingly install malware. Security cannot be enforced consistently across unmanaged devices, increasing exposure to threats and potential compromise.

Disabling remote access improves network security superficially but prevents employees from working efficiently. Blocking access entirely is impractical in modern business environments that require mobility, collaboration, and cloud-based services. This approach restricts productivity without providing targeted mitigation against unauthorized access.

Implementing multi-factor authentication with device compliance checks and a VPN gateway provides the most effective protection. MFA adds a verification layer beyond credentials, reducing the risk of account compromise even if passwords are stolen. Device compliance checks verify that endpoints meet organizational security requirements, such as updated operating systems, active antivirus, and configuration compliance, before granting access. The VPN gateway enforces secure, encrypted connections, ensuring data confidentiality and integrity during transmission. Conditional access policies can restrict access based on user role, location, or device posture, further reducing risk. Logging and monitoring provide visibility into remote access attempts, supporting incident response and compliance. This layered approach ensures that only authorized users on secure, compliant devices can access internal resources, minimizing the risk of unauthorized connections while maintaining productivity.

The reasoning highlights that combining MFA, device compliance, and VPN gateways creates a strong, enforceable, and flexible remote access solution. Allowing unrestricted connections, relying on trust, or disabling access introduces operational gaps or security weaknesses.

Question 69

A company wants to prevent data leakage through cloud applications used by employees. Which solution provides the strongest protection without disrupting business operations?

A) Allowing unrestricted file sharing in cloud apps
B) Implementing Cloud Access Security Broker (CASB) with data loss prevention (DLP)
C) Trusting employees not to share sensitive information
D) Disabling cloud applications to prevent risk

Answer: B)

Explanation:

Preventing data leakage in cloud environments requires both visibility and control over information flows. Allowing unrestricted file sharing in cloud applications creates a high risk. Employees may inadvertently share sensitive data with unauthorized users, external collaborators, or the public. This approach prioritizes convenience but exposes the organization to compliance violations, intellectual property theft, and regulatory penalties.

Trusting employees not to share sensitive information is unreliable. Human behavior is inconsistent, and even well-intentioned employees may make mistakes, such as sending data to personal email accounts, sharing links publicly, or using unauthorized services. Policies alone cannot enforce control, leaving significant security gaps.

Disabling cloud applications altogether prevents data leakage but significantly disrupts productivity and collaboration. Many business processes rely on cloud apps for file sharing, communication, and project management. Blocking access is impractical in modern workplaces, creating operational inefficiencies and potentially encouraging shadow IT, which introduces even greater risks.

Implementing a Cloud Access Security Broker with data loss prevention provides the strongest protection. CASB solutions provide visibility into cloud usage, detect anomalous behavior, and enforce security policies across sanctioned applications. Integration with DLP enables monitoring, classification, and control of sensitive information. Policies can restrict download, sharing, and printing of protected data, enforce encryption, or block unauthorized access. CASB can detect unsanctioned applications and enforce security controls across all cloud services, mitigating shadow IT risks. Alerts and reporting provide audit trails for compliance and incident response. By combining monitoring, policy enforcement, and automated controls, CASB with DLP protects sensitive data without impeding legitimate business activities. This layered approach ensures confidentiality, regulatory compliance, and operational continuity, addressing risks inherent in cloud collaboration environments.

The reasoning demonstrates that CASB with DLP provides proactive, enforceable, and scalable protection against cloud data leakage. Unrestricted access, reliance on user behavior, or disabling cloud applications either exposes the organization or disrupts productivity.

Question 70

A company wants to prevent privilege escalation attacks on its Linux servers. Which solution provides the most effective mitigation?

A) Allowing all users to have root access
B) Implementing sudo with least privilege, logging, and regular audits
C) Trusting users to avoid executing privileged commands
D) Disabling logging to improve performance

Answer: B)

Explanation:

Privilege escalation allows attackers to gain unauthorized access to higher-level permissions, potentially compromising the entire system. Allowing all users root access is extremely dangerous. Any compromised account immediately has full control over the system, enabling attackers to modify critical files, install malware, or exfiltrate data. This approach maximizes risk and eliminates accountability.

Trusting users to avoid executing privileged commands is unreliable. Even well-trained users may make mistakes, and attackers may exploit social engineering, phishing, or malware to gain elevated access. Human behavior cannot be consistently relied upon to prevent privilege escalation.

Disabling logging removes visibility into system activity. Without audit trails, privilege escalation attempts cannot be detected, investigated, or remediated. Performance improvements are minimal compared to the security risk introduced by the lack of monitoring.

Implementing sudo with least privilege, logging, and regular audits provides the most effective mitigation. Sudo allows users to execute specific commands with elevated privileges while restricting full root access. Policies enforce least privilege, granting only the permissions necessary for specific tasks. Logging captures command execution, enabling administrators to detect abnormal activity or attempted misuse. Regular audits review sudo access, ensuring compliance with policies and identifying potential misuse or misconfigurations. By combining controlled privilege delegation, monitoring, and auditing, organizations reduce the risk of privilege escalation while maintaining operational efficiency. This approach enforces accountability, limits potential damage, and supports proactive security management.

The reasoning highlights that sudo with least privilege, logging, and audits is a proactive, controlled, and auditable approach to prevent privilege escalation, whereas unrestricted root access, reliance on user behavior, or disabled logging introduces significant risk.

Question 71

A company wants to prevent unauthorized access to sensitive applications from mobile devices. Which solution provides the strongest protection while maintaining usability?

A) Allowing all mobile devices to access applications freely
B) Implementing Mobile Device Management (MDM) with conditional access and device compliance checks
C) Trusting users to secure their own devices
D) Disabling mobile access entirely

Answer: B)

Explanation:

Securing sensitive applications on mobile devices is increasingly critical due to the rise of the mobile workforce, bring-your-own-device (BYOD) policies, and the complexity of mobile malware. Allowing all mobile devices to access applications freely is inherently risky. Unmanaged devices could be compromised with malware, lack encryption, or have weak authentication controls. Without any verification or enforcement, attackers can exploit stolen credentials, unsecured devices, or vulnerable operating systems to gain unauthorized access. This approach prioritizes convenience over security, leaving critical business data and applications exposed to potential compromise.

Trusting users to secure their own devices is also insufficient. While some users may implement good security practices, human behavior is inconsistent. Users may neglect updates, disable security features, or install unverified applications that introduce malware or data leakage risks. Relying on user vigilance creates gaps in protection and is not a scalable or enforceable strategy for enterprise environments. It also makes auditing and compliance difficult, as there is no way to ensure that devices meet security standards.

Disabling mobile access entirely enhances security by preventing potential attacks through endpoints that cannot be controlled. However, this approach negatively impacts productivity and usability. Modern businesses rely heavily on mobile access for collaboration, communication, and access to critical applications. Completely blocking mobile access may force employees to use alternative, potentially less secure methods for accessing data, such as personal email or shadow IT solutions, creating indirect security risks.

Implementing Mobile Device Management (MDM) with conditional access and device compliance checks provides the strongest protection while maintaining usability. MDM allows administrators to manage both corporate-owned and BYOD devices, enforcing security policies across a variety of device types and operating systems. Conditional access ensures that only devices meeting predefined compliance requirements, such as updated OS versions, active encryption, passcodes, or endpoint protection, are granted access to sensitive applications. Devices that fail compliance checks can be restricted or quarantined, preventing unauthorized access. MDM solutions also enable remote wipe, encryption enforcement, application management, and secure containerization of corporate data. Integration with identity providers allows centralized authentication and monitoring, providing visibility into device status, user activity, and access patterns. This layered approach reduces risk by enforcing security consistently, detecting anomalous behavior, and responding rapidly to potential compromises. Furthermore, usability is maintained because employees can continue using their mobile devices while complying with security standards, ensuring productivity is not sacrificed for protection.

The reasoning shows that the combination of MDM, conditional access, and compliance checks creates a proactive, enforceable, and flexible solution. Unrestricted access, user-managed security, or complete blocking either exposes the organization or hinders productivity. MDM provides granular control, auditability, and real-time enforcement, ensuring sensitive applications remain protected from unauthorized mobile access without negatively impacting legitimate users. By enforcing policies, monitoring endpoints, and integrating with identity systems, organizations can confidently extend secure application access to mobile devices while reducing the likelihood of data breaches and unauthorized access attempts.

Question 72

A company wants to ensure secure authentication for remote employees accessing cloud services. Which solution provides the most effective protection?

A) Using passwords only
B) Implementing multi-factor authentication A with device posture assessment and conditional access
C) Trusting employees to follow strong password policies
D) Allowing unrestricted access from any device

Answer: B)

Explanation:

Authentication is a critical layer of defense for cloud services, especially for remote employees who may access resources from unmanaged or personal devices. Using passwords only provides minimal protection. Passwords can be stolen, guessed, or phished. Even complex passwords are vulnerable to attacks such as credential stuffing, keylogging, and brute force. Passwords alone do not account for compromised devices or session hijacking, making them insufficient for securing access to sensitive cloud applications.

Trusting employees to follow strong password policies is unreliable. Users may reuse passwords across accounts, write them down, or fail to update them when required. Relying solely on human compliance introduces risk because human behavior is inconsistent and prone to error. Without technical enforcement, security policies cannot reliably prevent unauthorized access.

Allowing unrestricted access from any device increases the attack surface significantly. Remote endpoints may lack encryption, malware protection, or security patches. Attackers can exploit compromised devices to access sensitive cloud resources, bypassing traditional authentication mechanisms. While convenient, this approach exposes the organization to credential theft, data exfiltration, and account compromise.

Implementing multi-factor authentication with device posture assessment and conditional access provides the most effective protection. MFA requires users to present additional verification factors, such as OTPs, push notifications, biometrics, or hardware tokens, in addition to passwords. Even if credentials are compromised, unauthorized access is prevented unless the attacker also has access to the second factor. Device posture assessment evaluates the security state of endpoints, checking for compliance with required policies, such as encryption, updated OS, active antivirus, and secure configurations. Conditional access allows administrators to enforce access rules dynamically based on factors such as device compliance, location, user role, and risk level. Users on non-compliant or risky devices can be blocked, quarantined, or required to meet security standards before access is granted. Integration with identity and access management systems ensures centralized enforcement, logging, and monitoring. This layered approach provides proactive protection against account compromise, credential theft, and unauthorized device access while maintaining usability for compliant users. Employees can access cloud services securely without unnecessary friction, and administrators retain visibility and control over authentication attempts.

The reasoning highlights that combining MFA, device posture, and conditional access addresses both identity and endpoint risk. Password-only approaches, reliance on user behavior, or unrestricted access fail to mitigate modern threats effectively. MFA enforces strong authentication, device posture ensures endpoint security, and conditional access allows granular control, providing a robust solution for secure cloud authentication in remote environments.

Question 73

A company wants to protect sensitive data in transit over untrusted networks. Which solution provides the strongest security without significantly impacting performance?

A) Transmitting data in clear text
B) Using end-to-end encryption protocols such as TLS or VPN tunnels
C) Trusting network providers to secure the traffic
D) Disabling encryption to improve performance

Answer: B)

Explanation:

Protecting data in transit is essential to prevent interception, eavesdropping, and tampering. Transmitting data in clear text exposes sensitive information to anyone on the network path, including attackers using packet sniffing tools. Clear text transmission is particularly dangerous over untrusted networks such as public Wi-Fi or shared corporate environments. Confidential information, credentials, and proprietary data can be intercepted, leading to breaches, identity theft, or intellectual property loss.

Trusting network providers to secure traffic is unreliable. Even managed networks can be compromised, and endpoints may not be isolated from malicious actors. While reputable providers may implement network security measures, they do not guarantee end-to-end protection, and data could be exposed in transit due to misconfigurations, insider threats, or routing vulnerabilities.

Disabling encryption to improve performance removes a fundamental layer of security. Although encryption adds some computational overhead, modern hardware and optimized protocols minimize performance impact. The security risk introduced by unencrypted traffic far outweighs any minor performance benefit. Without encryption, sensitive data is fully exposed to interception, tampering, and man-in-the-middle attacks.

Using end-to-end encryption protocols such as TLS or VPN tunnels provides the strongest security. TLS ensures data confidentiality, integrity, and authenticity between communicating parties, preventing eavesdropping, tampering, and impersonation. VPN tunnels create secure, encrypted channels over untrusted networks, protecting traffic between endpoints and corporate resources. Encryption ensures that only authorized endpoints can access and interpret the data, even if intercepted by attackers. Modern implementations optimize encryption to minimize latency and computational overhead. Combined with strong key management, certificate verification, and secure protocol configuration, encryption provides robust protection without significantly impacting performance. This solution also supports compliance with data protection regulations, protects credentials, and mitigates risks of interception or data leakage over public or shared networks.

The reasoning demonstrates that end-to-end encryption ensures data confidentiality, integrity, and security in transit. Clear text transmission, reliance on network providers, or disabling encryption introduces significant risk without effective mitigation. TLS and VPN tunnels provide a scalable, secure, and performant method for protecting sensitive communications across untrusted networks.

Question 74

A company wants to reduce the risk of unauthorized physical access to data center servers. Which solution provides the strongest security while allowing operational efficiency?

A) Allowing open access to all employees
B) Implementing layered physical security controls, including access cards, biometrics, and surveillance
C) Trusting employees not to enter restricted areas
D) Disabling locks and alarms to improve convenience

Answer: B)

Explanation:

Physical access to data center servers is a critical security concern, as unauthorized individuals could steal, damage, or tamper with equipment, compromising sensitive data and operational integrity. Allowing open access to all employees creates extreme risk. Without restriction, anyone can enter, potentially bypassing logical security controls, introducing malware-laden devices, or physically tampering with systems. This approach maximizes vulnerability and is incompatible with compliance or regulatory requirements.

Trusting employees not to enter restricted areas is insufficient. Even well-intentioned staff may make mistakes, ignore policies, or be coerced into granting access. Human trust cannot replace enforceable security measures. It provides no monitoring, deterrence, or accountability in case of incidents.

Disabling locks and alarms to improve convenience removes essential security layers. While it may simplify workflow, it exposes servers to theft, tampering, and accidental or intentional damage. The absence of monitoring or deterrence allows unauthorized individuals to compromise data and operations without detection.

Implementing layered physical security controls, including access cards, biometrics, and surveillance, provides the strongest protection while maintaining operational efficiency. Access cards enforce identity verification and log entry attempts, allowing tracking and accountability. Biometrics, such as fingerprints or iris scans, add a second factor of authentication, ensuring only authorized personnel can enter secure areas. Surveillance cameras monitor entrances, sensitive zones, and critical systems, providing both deterrence and evidence for investigations. Combined with security guards, intrusion detection, and alarm systems, this layered approach creates redundancy, ensuring that even if one control fails, others remain to prevent unauthorized access. Access policies can be integrated with scheduling and operational needs to maintain workflow efficiency. Emergency procedures, visitor management, and restricted zones ensure operational continuity while maintaining strict physical security. By implementing these measures, organizations reduce the risk of theft, tampering, and unauthorized access without significantly impacting legitimate operational activities.

The reasoning highlights that layered physical security creates a proactive, enforceable, and monitored approach to protect critical infrastructure. Open access, reliance on trust, or disabling controlseexposedata center resources to significant risk, whereas access cards, biometrics, surveillance, and alarm systems provide comprehensive security with operational flexibility.

Question 75

A company wants to protect sensitive files from unauthorized sharing or exfiltration. Which solution provides the most effective protection without disrupting business processes?

A) Allowing all employees to freely share files
B) Implementing Data Loss Prevention (DLP) with content inspection, policy enforcement, and monitoring
C) Trusting employees to handle sensitive data responsibly
D) Disabling file sharing to prevent risk

Answer: B)

Explanation:

Protecting sensitive files from unauthorized sharing or exfiltration is critical to maintaining confidentiality, compliance, and business integrity. Allowing all employees to freely share files introduces high risk. Sensitive data could be sent to unauthorized recipients, uploaded to personal cloud storage, or distributed outside the organization without control. While convenient, this approach exposes intellectual property, customer information, and regulatory compliance to potential compromise.

Relying solely on employees to manage sensitive data responsibly is inherently inconsistent and cannot provide reliable protection. Human behavior is unpredictable; even well-intentioned employees can make mistakes, such as sending confidential information to the wrong recipient, misconfiguring access permissions, or inadvertently exposing files through insecure channels. Negligence, such as failing to follow encryption protocols or ignoring security procedures, further increases the likelihood of accidental data breaches. Beyond errors, there is also the risk of intentional misuse or malicious insider activity, where employees exploit access privileges to exfiltrate sensitive information for personal gain or to harm the organization. Policies that depend entirely on trust, without technical enforcement, cannot ensure that these risks are mitigated. Without automated controls to enforce encryption, restrict access, monitor usage, or block unauthorized transfers, sensitive data remains vulnerable regardless of employee awareness or training. The variability in individual behavior across the organization introduces inconsistent protection, creating gaps that attackers or internal mistakes can exploit. To effectively safeguard sensitive information, organizations must combine clear policies with enforceable technical controls, ensuring that data protection does not rely solely on human judgment.

Disabling file sharing prevents data exfiltration but significantly disrupts business processes. Modern operations rely on collaboration, cloud storage, and shared resources. Blocking sharing entirely may reduce productivity, encourage shadow IT, or cause employees to use unmonitored methods, which increases indirect risk and operational inefficiency.

Implementing Data Loss Prevention with content inspection, policy enforcement, and monitoring provides the most effective protection. DLP identifies, classifies, and monitors sensitive content based on predefined policies, such as intellectual property, personally identifiable information (PII), or financial records. Policy enforcement can block unauthorized transmission, encrypt files, or quarantine suspicious activity automatically. Monitoring and alerting provide visibility into data movement and potential violations, supporting incident response and compliance reporting. DLP can integrate with cloud storage, email, endpoints, and network infrastructure to ensure comprehensive coverage. By enforcing technical controls, organizations maintain security while allowing legitimate business processes to continue efficiently. This layered approach prevents unauthorized sharing, reduces accidental exposure, and supports regulatory compliance, providing proactive protection without impacting productivity.

The reasoning demonstrates that DLP with inspection, enforcement, and monitoring is the most reliable solution for protecting sensitive files. Free sharing, reliance on employee behavior, or disabling sharing either introduces significant risk or hinders business operations, whereas DLP enables secure, controlled collaboration while maintaining operational efficiency.