Microsoft SC-100 Cybersecurity Architect Exam Dumps and Practice Test Questions Set 1 Q1-15
Visit here for our full Microsoft SC-100 exam dumps and practice test questions.
Question1:
An organization wants to enforce conditional access policies to ensure that only compliant devices can access sensitive Microsoft 365 data. Which approach best addresses this requirement?
A) Use Microsoft Entra ID Conditional Access policies with device compliance checks
B) Implement traditional Active Directory Group Policy Objects without cloud integration
C) Require VPN access with IP address restrictions only
D) Manage access through local accounts with manual provisioning
Answer:
A
Explanation:
Option A, using Microsoft Entra ID Conditional Access policies with device compliance checks, is the most effective method to control access to sensitive data in a modern enterprise environment. Conditional Access in Microsoft Entra ID is designed to evaluate multiple signals before granting access, including user identity, device compliance, location, and risk level. By integrating device compliance checks, organizations can ensure that only devices that meet security standards—such as having encryption enabled, updated operating systems, and endpoint protection—are allowed to access critical Microsoft 365 resources. This approach is adaptive and cloud-native, enabling organizations to maintain security without impeding user productivity. Unlike traditional on-premises solutions, Conditional Access evaluates requests in real-time, allowing for dynamic policy enforcement.
Option B, implementing traditional Active Directory Group Policy Objects (GPOs) without cloud integration, lacks the ability to enforce security policies on cloud resources. While GPOs can enforce compliance on domain-joined machines, they do not have visibility into devices accessing Microsoft 365 services from remote or unmanaged endpoints. This limitation creates potential security gaps, as non-compliant devices could still access sensitive data. Moreover, GPOs do not provide real-time risk evaluation, which means they cannot respond dynamically to unusual sign-in behaviors or risky locations. Therefore, relying solely on on-premises GPOs is insufficient for a modern cloud-first environment.
Option C, requiring VPN access with IP address restrictions only, provides some network-level security but does not account for device compliance or user identity risk. While IP restrictions can limit access to certain geographic locations or corporate networks, they are static and cannot adapt to changing conditions such as a compromised device or a high-risk login attempt. This approach does not provide visibility into device health or enforce compliance standards, making it a weaker option for organizations aiming to secure sensitive cloud resources comprehensively.
Option D, managing access through local accounts with manual provisioning, is highly inefficient and insecure. Local accounts are difficult to scale, cannot provide centralized monitoring, and do not integrate with cloud-native security features. Manual provisioning increases the risk of misconfiguration and cannot enforce policies consistently across a distributed workforce. It also lacks the capability to evaluate device compliance or enforce adaptive controls based on risk signals. Therefore, this approach is not suitable for securing cloud resources in a modern enterprise scenario.
Question2:
A multinational company wants to secure its hybrid environment, ensuring that users are authenticated using strong identity verification before accessing cloud and on-premises applications. Which solution provides the most comprehensive approach?
A) Implement Microsoft Entra ID Identity Protection and Conditional Access
B) Apply legacy Active Directory password policies without MFA
C) Require VPN access without risk evaluation
D) Use local administrative accounts for all users with strict passwords
Answer:
A
Explanation:
Option A, implementing Microsoft Entra ID Identity Protection and Conditional Access, provides a comprehensive solution for securing hybrid environments. Microsoft Entra ID Identity Protection leverages real-time risk assessments to detect suspicious activities such as atypical login locations, anonymous IP addresses, and potential compromised credentials. When combined with Conditional Access, organizations can enforce adaptive policies that require multi-factor authentication (MFA) or block access based on risk levels. This integrated approach ensures that only verified, low-risk users can access both cloud and on-premises applications, providing an effective balance between security and user productivity. Additionally, it scales effectively across distributed users and devices, supporting both managed and unmanaged endpoints.
Option B, applying legacy Active Directory password policies without MFA, is insufficient in today’s security landscape. Password-only authentication is vulnerable to credential theft, phishing attacks, and brute-force attempts. Without MFA, there is no additional verification mechanism to confirm user identity, leaving critical resources exposed. Legacy password policies also cannot dynamically respond to high-risk scenarios, meaning they fail to prevent unauthorized access from compromised accounts. This approach does not meet the security needs of a hybrid enterprise where users may access cloud applications from multiple locations and devices.
Option C, requiring VPN access without risk evaluation, provides limited protection by securing the network perimeter but does not account for identity or device risks. Users connecting through a VPN may still access cloud applications from compromised or non-compliant devices. Without real-time evaluation, VPN-only access cannot detect anomalous behavior or enforce adaptive policies based on user and device risk levels. Therefore, this approach falls short of delivering comprehensive identity and access management in a hybrid cloud environment.
Option D, using local administrative accounts with strict passwords, is highly risky and impractical. Local accounts are not scalable, cannot integrate with cloud-based monitoring, and do not support centralized policy enforcement. Strict passwords alone cannot protect against credential theft or sophisticated attacks, and manual management increases the likelihood of errors. This approach does not provide the dynamic, risk-aware controls necessary for securing hybrid environments, making it the least effective option.
Question3:
An organization needs to implement identity governance to ensure that users have appropriate access levels and that access is reviewed regularly. Which solution best supports these requirements?
A) Microsoft Entra ID entitlement management and access reviews
B) Manual spreadsheet tracking of user permissions
C) VPN access control lists updated quarterly
D) Local account permission assignment with ad hoc audits
Answer:
A
Explanation:
Option A, using Microsoft Entra ID entitlement management and access reviews, is the optimal solution for implementing identity governance in a modern enterprise. Entitlement management allows organizations to define access packages, assign them to users, and automate approval workflows for resource access. This ensures that users are granted access only to the resources they need, adhering to the principle of least privilege. Access reviews provide ongoing monitoring by periodically evaluating user permissions and prompting managers or resource owners to approve, remove, or adjust access based on current job requirements. This automated and structured approach significantly reduces the risk of over-provisioned accounts, orphaned accounts, and excessive privileges, which are common security challenges in large, distributed organizations.
Option B, manual spreadsheet tracking of user permissions, is highly error-prone and unsustainable. While spreadsheets can record assignments, they do not support automated approvals, alerts, or periodic reviews. Human error can result in outdated permissions remaining active, creating significant security risks. Additionally, spreadsheets cannot integrate with cloud applications for real-time access adjustments, leaving organizations unable to respond effectively to dynamic access requirements.
Option C, VPN access control lists updated quarterly, provides very limited governance. ACLs only control network-level access and do not manage individual permissions within applications or services. Quarterly updates are infrequent and fail to ensure that access reflects current user roles and responsibilities. This method does not support compliance reporting or automated review processes, which are critical for regulatory and security standards.
Option D, local account permission assignment with ad hoc audits, is inefficient and insecure. Manual assignment of permissions is prone to mistakes and cannot scale across enterprise environments. Ad hoc audits are irregular and may not capture unauthorized access promptly. This method does not offer automation, periodic reviews, or integration with cloud applications, making it unsuitable for modern identity governance and compliance requirements.
Question4:
A company experiences frequent security incidents due to compromised user credentials. They want to proactively detect and respond to risky sign-ins. Which Microsoft solution provides the most effective mechanism for this purpose?
A) Microsoft Entra ID Identity Protection with risk-based Conditional Access
B) Traditional Active Directory password expiration policies
C) VPN access without monitoring or alerts
D) Local accounts with complex password requirements
Answer:
A
Explanation:
Option A, Microsoft Entra ID Identity Protection with risk-based Conditional Access, is the most effective solution to proactively detect and mitigate compromised credentials. Identity Protection continuously evaluates user sign-ins for indicators of risk, such as unfamiliar locations, multiple failed login attempts, and atypical sign-in patterns. When a risk is detected, Conditional Access policies can enforce adaptive controls, such as requiring MFA, blocking access, or forcing a password reset. This proactive approach reduces the likelihood of successful credential-based attacks and enhances overall security posture. Identity Protection also generates detailed reports and analytics, enabling security teams to monitor trends and respond to threats efficiently. This dynamic, signal-based method is far more effective than static password policies.
Option B, traditional Active Directory password expiration policies, offers limited protection against credential compromise. While periodic password changes reduce the window of opportunity for attackers, they do not detect ongoing suspicious activities or respond to high-risk sign-ins in real-time. This reactive approach cannot adapt to modern threats such as phishing, credential stuffing, or account takeovers, making it insufficient for proactive security.
Option C, VPN access without monitoring or alerts, provides network-level security but no mechanism to detect risky sign-ins. Users could connect to the network using stolen credentials without triggering any alerts. Without monitoring or adaptive controls, VPN-only solutions fail to prevent compromised credentials from accessing critical applications and data.
Option D, local accounts with complex password requirements, offer minimal protection. Complexity requirements alone do not prevent credential compromise, especially against phishing or replay attacks. Local accounts lack centralized monitoring and cannot enforce dynamic, risk-aware responses, making this approach inadequate for addressing modern security incidents effectively.
Question5:
A company wants to enable secure collaboration with external partners while ensuring access is controlled and monitored. Which approach best meets this requirement?
A) Microsoft Entra B2B collaboration with Conditional Access and access reviews
B) SharePoint on-premises with open sharing links
C) Manual email approval for each document shared externally
D) Local user accounts created for each external collaborator without monitoring
Answer:
A
Explanation:
Option A, Microsoft Entra B2B collaboration with Conditional Access and access reviews, is the most effective approach to enabling secure external collaboration. B2B collaboration allows organizations to invite external users into their directory securely and manage their access to resources based on policies. Conditional Access ensures that access is evaluated continuously, considering device compliance, user risk, and sign-in behavior. Access reviews further ensure that external users retain access only as long as necessary, reducing the risk of overexposure. This approach provides auditability, regulatory compliance, and secure collaboration across cloud and hybrid environments. It also integrates seamlessly with Microsoft 365 applications, enabling a controlled and scalable external access framework.
Option B, SharePoint on-premises with open sharing links, is insecure because anyone with the link can access the resource, bypassing user verification, risk assessment, and auditing. This method lacks visibility, policy enforcement, and granular access control, exposing sensitive data to potential leaks.
Option C, manual email approval for each document shared externally, is operationally inefficient and prone to errors. It cannot scale for frequent collaboration or integrate with modern cloud security policies. There is no ongoing monitoring, meaning once access is granted, it may persist indefinitely without review.
Option D, local user accounts created for each external collaborator without monitoring, is highly insecure and unsustainable. Managing numerous local accounts manually increases administrative overhead and risk. Without monitoring, it is impossible to track access, enforce security policies, or remove accounts promptly when no longer needed, making this approach unsuitable for secure collaboration.
Question6:
A financial services company wants to detect suspicious activity and prevent compromised accounts from accessing sensitive cloud resources. Which solution provides the most effective security mechanism?
A) Microsoft Entra ID Identity Protection with Conditional Access risk-based policies
B) Traditional Active Directory password policies with periodic changes only
C) VPN access restricted by IP addresses without monitoring
D) Local user accounts with complex passwords and no auditing
Answer:
A
Explanation:
Option A, Microsoft Entra ID Identity Protection with Conditional Access risk-based policies, offers the most robust mechanism for detecting suspicious activity and mitigating the risk of compromised accounts in cloud environments. Identity Protection continuously monitors sign-ins and evaluates multiple signals, including user location, device health, anonymous IP usage, and behavioral anomalies, to determine whether a sign-in should be considered high risk. Conditional Access then applies adaptive policies to respond to these risk signals dynamically. For example, if a sign-in attempt is flagged as risky due to an unfamiliar location or a newly observed device, the system can require multi-factor authentication (MFA), block access entirely, or force the user to reset their password. This real-time, intelligent, and automated approach reduces the likelihood of unauthorized access and ensures that only verified, compliant users can access sensitive financial data. Furthermore, this method supports hybrid and cloud-only scenarios, enabling protection across both Microsoft 365 and other enterprise applications. Risk-based policies can be configured to enforce stricter measures for highly sensitive resources, ensuring that compliance and security standards are consistently maintained across the organization.
Option B, traditional Active Directory password policies with periodic changes only, is significantly less effective because it relies on static security measures. While password expiration policies can reduce the time window during which stolen credentials are effective, they do not detect ongoing or anomalous activity. Passwords alone cannot prevent credential compromise from phishing attacks, keyloggers, or leaked credentials. There is no adaptive control or real-time assessment of risk; therefore, even if a password has been changed recently, a compromised account can still be exploited. This reactive approach is insufficient for modern enterprises that require continuous, context-aware evaluation of sign-in behavior and user risk.
Option C, VPN access restricted by IP addresses without monitoring, provides only limited network-level protection. While restricting VPN access to specific IP ranges can reduce the attack surface, it does not account for compromised credentials or risky devices. A VPN-only approach cannot detect unusual login patterns, devices that fail compliance checks, or suspicious geographic activity. Without real-time monitoring and adaptive responses, attackers could exploit stolen credentials within permitted IP ranges, bypassing the static restrictions. This solution does not align with the needs of financial institutions that require granular, adaptive control over sensitive cloud-based resources.
Option D, local user accounts with complex passwords and no auditing, is the least secure and least scalable approach. Local accounts require manual provisioning and do not integrate with centralized security management. While complex passwords may provide some basic resistance to brute-force attacks, they do not protect against phishing, credential reuse, or other forms of account compromise. The absence of auditing or monitoring means suspicious activity may go unnoticed for extended periods, creating significant security vulnerabilities. Additionally, this method is impractical for large organizations with numerous users and remote work scenarios, making it unsuitable for protecting critical financial resources in a cloud-integrated environment.
Question7:
A global company is implementing identity governance to ensure users only have access to resources necessary for their job roles. Which solution provides the most scalable and compliant approach?
A) Microsoft Entra ID entitlement management with access reviews
B) Manually tracking access permissions in spreadsheets
C) VPN access lists updated quarterly
D) Local accounts assigned permissions without periodic review
Answer:
A
Explanation:
Option A, Microsoft Entra ID entitlement management with access reviews, is the most scalable and compliant approach for identity governance. Entitlement management allows organizations to define access packages for specific roles and resources, assign them to users, and automate approvals through defined workflows. Access reviews provide a mechanism for periodically re-evaluating user access, ensuring that permissions remain appropriate based on changes in job responsibilities, project assignments, or organizational restructuring. This automation ensures compliance with regulatory requirements such as GDPR, HIPAA, and SOX by maintaining a clear audit trail of access assignments and reviews. It also mitigates the risks of over-provisioned accounts, orphaned accounts, and excessive privileges that could lead to unauthorized access to sensitive data. By combining access packages with automated reviews, organizations achieve continuous enforcement of the principle of least privilege.
Option B, manually tracking access permissions in spreadsheets, is error-prone and non-scalable. Spreadsheets require human intervention for updates, approvals, and reviews, which can lead to inconsistencies, delayed revocation of access, and mistakes in recording who has access to which resources. Additionally, spreadsheets do not integrate with cloud applications or provide automated workflows, making it difficult to maintain compliance with auditing and regulatory standards. The lack of automation significantly increases administrative overhead and introduces risk of human error.
Option C, VPN access lists updated quarterly, is inadequate for identity governance. Network-level access restrictions do not control permissions within individual applications or cloud resources. Updating access lists only quarterly is too infrequent to ensure that access aligns with current job roles, especially in dynamic global organizations where employee responsibilities frequently change. This approach cannot provide detailed audit logs or compliance reporting for internal or external regulatory requirements.
Option D, local accounts assigned permissions without periodic review, is unsustainable and insecure. Manual assignment without scheduled reviews can lead to users retaining access they no longer need, creating security vulnerabilities. Local accounts do not support centralized monitoring, automated auditing, or integration with cloud-based identity governance solutions, making it difficult to scale and maintain security standards across a large, distributed workforce.
Question8:
A healthcare organization must comply with strict regulatory requirements while allowing secure access to cloud applications for remote staff. Which solution best addresses this requirement?
A) Microsoft Entra ID Conditional Access with device compliance and risk-based policies
B) Traditional Active Directory password policies without MFA
C) VPN access limited to corporate IP ranges
D) Local accounts with complex passwords and no monitoring
Answer:
A
Explanation:
Option A, Microsoft Entra ID Conditional Access with device compliance and risk-based policies, provides the best solution for regulatory compliance and secure remote access. Conditional Access evaluates user sign-ins in real-time using multiple signals, including device compliance, user risk, and location. Device compliance ensures that only approved devices with security configurations such as encryption, endpoint protection, and up-to-date patches can access sensitive healthcare data. Risk-based policies allow the organization to require MFA or block access when high-risk activity is detected, providing an additional layer of protection. This approach supports healthcare regulatory requirements, including HIPAA and HITECH, by ensuring that access to electronic health records and other sensitive data is controlled, monitored, and auditable. It also facilitates secure access for remote staff while maintaining compliance with organizational policies and external regulations.
Option B, traditional Active Directory password policies without MFA, is insufficient for protecting sensitive healthcare data. Passwords alone cannot prevent credential theft, phishing, or account takeover, and the absence of MFA leaves accounts vulnerable to unauthorized access. This static approach does not provide risk-based access evaluation, real-time monitoring, or adaptive controls, which are essential for ensuring regulatory compliance in a dynamic, remote-access environment.
Option C, VPN access limited to corporate IP ranges, provides only network-level control and does not address device compliance, user risk, or regulatory auditing. While VPN restrictions limit access to the corporate network, they cannot verify that connecting devices meet security standards or respond to risky sign-in behavior. This method lacks the granularity and adaptability required for healthcare organizations to maintain compliance with strict regulatory standards while supporting remote work.
Option D, local accounts with complex passwords and no monitoring, is highly insecure and impractical. Local accounts cannot be centrally managed, monitored, or audited effectively. Without continuous oversight or adaptive policies, unauthorized access could occur without detection, leading to regulatory violations and potential breaches of sensitive patient information. This approach does not scale for a distributed workforce and fails to provide the necessary compliance and security controls required in the healthcare sector.
Question9:
A company wants to allow secure external collaboration while maintaining control over access and monitoring usage. Which approach is most appropriate?
A) Microsoft Entra B2B collaboration with Conditional Access and access reviews
B) SharePoint on-premises with unrestricted sharing links
C) Manual email approvals for each document shared externally
D) Local accounts for each external collaborator without monitoring
Answer:
A
Explanation:
Option A, Microsoft Entra B2B collaboration with Conditional Access and access reviews, is the most appropriate solution for secure external collaboration. B2B collaboration allows external partners to be invited into the organization’s directory securely, with identity and access managed centrally. Conditional Access policies enforce device compliance, MFA, and risk-based controls for external users, ensuring secure access to corporate resources. Access reviews provide periodic evaluations to confirm that external users still require access, mitigating the risk of overexposed or outdated permissions. This approach ensures compliance with regulatory requirements, provides visibility into external activity, and scales efficiently across multiple partners. The combination of adaptive access controls, auditing, and access reviews creates a secure and manageable external collaboration environment while minimizing administrative overhead.
Option B, SharePoint on-premises with unrestricted sharing links, is highly insecure. Open links allow anyone with the URL to access documents, bypassing authentication, risk evaluation, and monitoring. This method exposes sensitive data to unauthorized access, lacks visibility and compliance controls, and does not provide the granularity required to manage external collaborators effectively.
Option C, manual email approvals for each document shared externally, is operationally inefficient and error-prone. While this method introduces some control, it does not scale well for organizations with frequent external collaboration. There is no automated monitoring, auditing, or ongoing access review, meaning once access is granted, it may persist indefinitely, creating compliance risks.
Option D, local accounts for each external collaborator without monitoring, is impractical and insecure. Manual account management increases administrative burden and is prone to mistakes. Without monitoring or access reviews, it is impossible to detect unauthorized activity or ensure timely revocation of access. This approach is unsuitable for modern organizations requiring secure, scalable external collaboration.
Question10:
An enterprise wants to implement a cloud-native approach to secure identity and access across all applications and devices. Which solution provides the most comprehensive coverage?
A) Microsoft Entra ID Conditional Access with Identity Protection and device compliance
B) Traditional Active Directory password policies
C) VPN access restricted to certain networks only
D) Local accounts with manual provisioning
Answer:
A
Explanation:
Option A, Microsoft Entra ID Conditional Access with Identity Protection and device compliance, provides the most comprehensive coverage for securing identity and access across applications and devices. Conditional Access evaluates multiple risk signals in real-time, including user identity, device compliance, location, and behavior patterns, allowing organizations to enforce adaptive policies dynamically. Identity Protection detects suspicious activities such as atypical sign-ins, compromised credentials, and unfamiliar devices. Device compliance ensures that only managed and secure endpoints can access corporate resources, while adaptive controls like MFA or access blocking provide immediate risk mitigation. This cloud-native approach integrates seamlessly across both Microsoft 365 and third-party applications, supporting a zero-trust security model that scales across global enterprises. It provides detailed audit logs, reporting, and compliance capabilities, ensuring that organizations meet regulatory standards while maintaining security across hybrid and cloud environments.
Option B, traditional Active Directory password policies, offers limited security. Passwords alone cannot detect risky behavior, enforce adaptive policies, or evaluate device compliance. This approach lacks real-time monitoring and does not scale effectively for cloud-based applications, leaving security gaps that modern attackers can exploit.
Option C, VPN access restricted to certain networks only, provides network-level security but does not address identity risk, device compliance, or real-time threat detection. Users could access applications with stolen credentials or from compromised devices within permitted networks, rendering this approach insufficient for comprehensive identity protection.
Option D, local accounts with manual provisioning, is the least secure and scalable option. Manual management increases administrative overhead, lacks monitoring, and cannot enforce centralized policies. Local accounts are inadequate for managing identity and access in a modern cloud-native enterprise, failing to provide adaptive controls, auditing, or compliance reporting.
Question11:
A multinational company wants to implement identity-based security that dynamically adapts based on user behavior, location, and device status. Which solution provides the most effective protection?
A) Microsoft Entra ID Conditional Access with Identity Protection and device compliance
B) Traditional Active Directory password expiration policies
C) VPN access restricted to corporate IP ranges without monitoring
D) Local accounts with manual provisioning and complex passwords
Answer:
A
Explanation:
Option A, Microsoft Entra ID Conditional Access with Identity Protection and device compliance, is the most effective solution for identity-based security that adapts dynamically to user behavior, location, and device status. Conditional Access evaluates multiple risk signals in real time, including the user’s location, device health, sign-in patterns, and other behavioral anomalies. Identity Protection adds an additional layer of security by continuously monitoring for potentially compromised accounts, unusual sign-in activity, and anomalies that could indicate a security threat. Device compliance ensures that only devices meeting organizational security standards—such as encryption, endpoint protection, and up-to-date operating systems—are permitted to access sensitive resources. By combining these capabilities, the solution enforces adaptive access policies that mitigate the risk of unauthorized access while allowing legitimate users to work seamlessly. For example, if a user attempts to sign in from an unusual location on a non-compliant device, the system can require multi-factor authentication (MFA), block the session, or trigger a password reset. This dynamic, context-aware enforcement aligns with the principles of zero-trust security and provides robust protection across hybrid and cloud environments.
Option B, traditional Active Directory password expiration policies, is far less effective because it relies on static, reactive measures. While periodic password changes can mitigate some risks from credential theft, they cannot detect ongoing threats, analyze user behavior, or enforce adaptive access controls. This method does not consider the risk level associated with a sign-in attempt, the compliance status of the device, or anomalies in user activity, making it insufficient for modern security challenges. Organizations relying solely on password policies face a higher risk of account compromise due to phishing, credential stuffing, and other attack vectors that exploit static credentials.
Option C, VPN access restricted to corporate IP ranges without monitoring, provides limited network-level protection but fails to address identity-based risk or dynamic access requirements. While restricting VPN access to known IP ranges can reduce the external attack surface, it cannot detect suspicious sign-in behavior, evaluate device compliance, or enforce MFA for high-risk activity. If credentials are compromised or a device is insecure, a threat actor could still access corporate resources through the VPN, rendering this approach inadequate for comprehensive security.
Option D, local accounts with manual provisioning and complex passwords, is the least scalable and secure option. Local accounts require intensive administrative management, cannot be monitored centrally, and do not integrate with cloud security solutions. Even with complex passwords, this method cannot detect suspicious behavior, evaluate device compliance, or enforce adaptive access controls. Manual provisioning increases the likelihood of errors, delayed revocation, and orphaned accounts, creating vulnerabilities that can be exploited by attackers. This approach is highly impractical for organizations with distributed users or cloud-based resources.
Question12:
An organization wants to implement secure external collaboration while maintaining control and auditing access. Which solution provides the most efficient and compliant method?
A) Microsoft Entra B2B collaboration with Conditional Access and periodic access reviews
B) SharePoint on-premises with unrestricted sharing links
C) Manual email approval for each document shared externally
D) Local accounts for each external collaborator without monitoring
Answer:
A
Explanation:
Option A, Microsoft Entra B2B collaboration with Conditional Access and periodic access reviews, is the most efficient and compliant solution for secure external collaboration. B2B collaboration enables organizations to invite external partners into their directory while maintaining centralized identity management. Conditional Access ensures that external users are evaluated for risk and device compliance before gaining access to corporate resources. Access reviews provide an ongoing mechanism to evaluate whether external collaborators still require access, allowing administrators to remove unnecessary or outdated permissions. This approach supports regulatory compliance, including data privacy standards, and reduces the likelihood of unauthorized access or data leakage. By combining secure onboarding, adaptive access controls, and continuous monitoring, organizations can facilitate collaboration while maintaining governance over sensitive data. The solution scales efficiently across multiple partners, projects, or geographies without significantly increasing administrative overhead.
Option B, SharePoint on-premises with unrestricted sharing links, is insecure because anyone with the link can access the content without authentication or risk evaluation. This method lacks visibility, auditing, and policy enforcement, exposing sensitive data to potential leaks. Open sharing links also do not support regulatory compliance or control over access duration, making this option unsuitable for secure external collaboration.
Option C, manual email approval for each document shared externally, is operationally inefficient and error-prone. While this method provides some control, it does not scale well for organizations with frequent external collaboration. There is no automated monitoring, risk assessment, or periodic review of access, meaning external users may retain access longer than necessary, increasing security and compliance risks.
Option D, local accounts for each external collaborator without monitoring, is highly impractical and insecure. Manual account creation increases administrative burden and introduces the possibility of misconfiguration or forgotten accounts. Without monitoring or access reviews, there is no way to ensure that external collaborators do not retain access after projects end, creating significant security and compliance vulnerabilities.
Question13:
A healthcare organization needs to protect sensitive patient data while enabling remote staff access to cloud applications. Which solution is most appropriate?
A) Microsoft Entra ID Conditional Access with device compliance and risk-based policies
B) Traditional Active Directory password policies without multi-factor authentication
C) VPN access limited to corporate networks only
D) Local accounts with complex passwords and no monitoring
Answer:
A
Explanation:
Option A, Microsoft Entra ID Conditional Access with device compliance and risk-based policies, is the most appropriate solution for protecting sensitive patient data while supporting remote access. Conditional Access evaluates the context of each sign-in, including device health, user risk, and location, and enforces policies such as MFA or blocking access when necessary. Device compliance ensures that only approved, secure devices can access patient data and healthcare applications. Risk-based policies dynamically adapt based on threat signals, providing protection against compromised accounts and unauthorized access. This approach aligns with regulatory requirements such as HIPAA and HITECH, ensuring that patient data is accessed only by authorized, compliant users while maintaining auditability and reporting for compliance purposes. It also enables remote staff to work efficiently without compromising security, supporting hybrid and telehealth environments.
Option B, traditional Active Directory password policies without MFA, is insufficient for healthcare data protection. Password-only authentication is vulnerable to phishing, credential reuse, and brute-force attacks. Without MFA or risk evaluation, compromised credentials can result in unauthorized access to sensitive patient data. This approach does not provide dynamic, real-time enforcement or auditing capabilities required for regulatory compliance.
Option C, VPN access limited to corporate networks only, provides network-level security but does not evaluate the risk of user behavior, device compliance, or anomalous activity. Users could still access sensitive data from insecure or non-compliant devices within allowed networks. VPN access alone cannot enforce the necessary regulatory protections or auditing requirements for sensitive healthcare data.
Option D, local accounts with complex passwords and no monitoring, is highly insecure and impractical. Local accounts are difficult to manage at scale, cannot be monitored centrally, and do not provide audit logs or policy enforcement. Even complex passwords do not prevent account compromise, leaving sensitive patient data vulnerable to unauthorized access. This approach is inadequate for regulatory compliance and modern healthcare operations.
Question14:
A global enterprise wants to proactively detect compromised accounts and respond automatically to high-risk sign-ins. Which Microsoft solution is best suited for this scenario?
A) Microsoft Entra ID Identity Protection with risk-based Conditional Access
B) Traditional Active Directory password expiration policies
C) VPN access with static IP restrictions
D) Local accounts with complex passwords and no monitoring
Answer:
A
Explanation:
Option A, Microsoft Entra ID Identity Protection with risk-based Conditional Access, is the best solution for proactively detecting compromised accounts and responding to high-risk sign-ins. Identity Protection continuously evaluates multiple risk factors, including unusual sign-in locations, anonymous IP usage, multiple failed login attempts, and deviations in user behavior. When a high-risk activity is detected, Conditional Access enforces adaptive responses, such as requiring MFA, blocking access, or prompting password resets. This proactive, automated approach minimizes the window of exposure for compromised accounts and reduces the likelihood of unauthorized access. It provides detailed reporting and analytics, enabling security teams to monitor trends, investigate incidents, and take corrective actions. By integrating risk detection, adaptive response, and monitoring, this solution supports a zero-trust security model and enhances overall enterprise security posture.
Option B, traditional Active Directory password expiration policies, is reactive and insufficient for modern threats. While periodic password changes reduce the duration of credential compromise, they do not detect or respond to suspicious activity in real-time. Static password policies cannot mitigate attacks such as phishing, credential stuffing, or account takeovers, leaving critical resources vulnerable.
Option C, VPN access with static IP restrictions, provides network-level control but does not address identity risk or user behavior anomalies. VPN-only solutions cannot detect high-risk sign-ins or enforce adaptive responses. Compromised accounts or insecure devices within allowed IP ranges may still access corporate resources, making this method inadequate for proactive security.
Option D, local accounts with complex passwords and no monitoring, is highly insecure and impractical. Manual management of local accounts does not provide centralized monitoring, risk evaluation, or automated response to suspicious activity. Complex passwords alone do not prevent compromise, and without auditing or monitoring, attacks may go undetected, increasing enterprise vulnerability.
Question15:
An enterprise wants to implement a cloud-native, zero-trust security model to manage identity and access across all applications and devices. Which approach provides the most comprehensive coverage?
A) Microsoft Entra ID Conditional Access with Identity Protection and device compliance
B) Traditional Active Directory password policies
C) VPN access restricted to corporate networks
D) Local accounts with manual provisioning
Answer:
A
Explanation:
Option A, Microsoft Entra ID Conditional Access with Identity Protection and device compliance, provides the most comprehensive coverage for a cloud-native, zero-trust security model. Conditional Access evaluates multiple risk signals, including user identity, device compliance, location, and behavior patterns, to enforce adaptive access policies. Identity Protection detects compromised accounts, unusual sign-ins, and high-risk activities, while device compliance ensures that only secure, managed endpoints can access corporate resources. This integrated, cloud-native approach provides real-time, dynamic enforcement across hybrid and cloud applications, supporting a zero-trust model where no user or device is trusted by default. Adaptive policies such as MFA, session controls, and access blocking allow organizations to respond immediately to threats. Detailed audit logs and reporting ensure compliance with regulatory requirements and facilitate monitoring of security posture. By combining identity protection, adaptive access, and device compliance, organizations achieve end-to-end control over access to sensitive data while enabling secure productivity across global operations.
Option B, traditional Active Directory password policies, offers limited security. Passwords alone cannot detect risky behavior, enforce adaptive access, or ensure device compliance. This approach does not scale effectively to cloud environments and cannot support zero-trust principles.
Option C, VPN access restricted to corporate networks, provides network-level control but fails to evaluate identity, device risk, or dynamic access scenarios. Users could access applications from compromised devices within allowed networks, making this approach insufficient for zero-trust security.
Option D, local accounts with manual provisioning, is highly insecure and difficult to scale. Manual account management does not allow centralized monitoring, auditing, or adaptive controls, leaving enterprise resources vulnerable to unauthorized access. This method cannot enforce cloud-native zero-trust security effectively.
Option A, Microsoft Entra ID Conditional Access with Identity Protection and device compliance, stands out as a modern, cloud-native solution that fully aligns with zero-trust security principles. Zero-trust emphasizes that no user, device, or network is trusted by default, requiring continuous verification and risk-based access control. Entra ID Conditional Access evaluates a broad set of signals, including user identity, sign-in risk, device compliance status, geolocation, network, and user behavior patterns. This real-time evaluation enables organizations to apply adaptive access controls dynamically rather than relying on static rules. For instance, if a user attempts to access sensitive data from a device that is out-of-compliance or from an unusual location, Conditional Access policies can automatically enforce additional security measures such as multi-factor authentication, block access, or restrict sessions. Identity Protection enhances this by continuously monitoring sign-ins and user behavior to identify anomalies, detect compromised accounts, and assign risk levels to users. High-risk users can be blocked from accessing corporate resources or required to perform identity verification steps, preventing potential breaches before they occur. Device compliance integrates endpoint management by ensuring that only devices meeting organizational security standards—such as encryption, endpoint protection, and OS updates—can access sensitive resources. This layered approach ensures that both the user and the device are verified continuously, providing end-to-end security that is critical for distributed and hybrid work environments. Furthermore, the solution integrates seamlessly across cloud and on-premises applications, allowing organizations to enforce consistent policies across all resources. Reporting and audit logs generated by this setup provide visibility into access patterns, potential threats, and compliance adherence, which is essential for regulatory requirements and internal security governance. The scalability and automation of Conditional Access also reduce administrative overhead compared to manual processes, allowing security teams to respond to evolving threats efficiently and maintain operational agility in large, globally distributed organizations. Overall, this approach ensures that access decisions are made intelligently, in real time, and based on comprehensive risk analysis, supporting a robust zero-trust framework.