Microsoft SC-100 Cybersecurity Architect Exam Dumps and Practice Test Questions Set 3 Q31-45

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

Question31:

A global enterprise wants to implement adaptive identity-based access controls that evaluate risk signals, device compliance, and user behavior in real time. Which solution is most effective?

A) Microsoft Entra ID Conditional Access with Identity Protection and device compliance
B) Traditional Active Directory password expiration policies
C) VPN access restricted by static IP addresses
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, provides the most effective adaptive identity-based access control solution. Conditional Access evaluates risk signals from user behavior, device compliance, location, and login patterns in real time. Identity Protection continuously monitors for compromised accounts, unusual sign-ins, and high-risk activities. When a high-risk scenario is detected, Conditional Access enforces adaptive measures such as multi-factor authentication, access blocking, or password reset requirements. Device compliance ensures that only endpoints meeting organizational security standards—such as encryption, OS patching, and endpoint protection—can access resources. This combination provides a dynamic, context-aware security framework that minimizes the likelihood of unauthorized access while maintaining operational efficiency for legitimate users. By integrating risk evaluation, adaptive controls, and device compliance, enterprises can implement zero-trust principles and maintain centralized monitoring, auditing, and reporting for regulatory compliance. Organizations benefit from scalable and cloud-native enforcement across hybrid and multi-cloud environments, supporting secure access for distributed workforces while providing detailed analytics for security operations teams.

Option B, traditional Active Directory password expiration policies, is reactive and insufficient. Password expiration policies only change static credentials periodically and cannot detect suspicious activity, evaluate device compliance, or enforce adaptive authentication. Password-only authentication is vulnerable to phishing, credential theft, and brute-force attacks. This approach does not scale effectively to cloud applications and hybrid environments, making it inadequate for modern security challenges.

Option C, VPN access restricted by static IP addresses, offers network-level controls but does not assess user identity, device compliance, or behavioral risk. Static IP restrictions cannot detect compromised accounts or adapt to changing threat conditions. Threat actors could still access resources within allowed networks, and VPN-only solutions lack centralized monitoring and integration with cloud applications.

Option D, local accounts with manual provisioning and complex passwords, is insecure and impractical. Manual management of accounts is labor-intensive and error-prone. Complex passwords alone cannot prevent unauthorized access, and local accounts cannot enforce adaptive policies, risk evaluation, or centralized monitoring. This approach does not support zero-trust or scalable enterprise security frameworks.

Question32:

A healthcare provider wants to enable secure remote access for clinicians while ensuring compliance with HIPAA regulations. Which solution provides the strongest protection?

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 strongest protection for healthcare organizations enabling remote access. Conditional Access evaluates sign-ins based on user identity, device compliance, geolocation, and risk signals, enforcing adaptive responses such as multi-factor authentication, access blocking, or password reset for high-risk activity. Device compliance ensures that only managed and secure endpoints can access sensitive healthcare data, such as electronic health records. Risk-based policies adapt dynamically to detect compromised accounts and unusual behavior, minimizing the risk of unauthorized access. This approach supports HIPAA compliance by providing audit trails, reporting, and continuous monitoring of access activity. Clinicians can securely access cloud applications remotely, supporting telehealth, hybrid work, and patient care without compromising security. Adaptive enforcement ensures minimal friction for legitimate users while maintaining strict controls for high-risk scenarios, embodying zero-trust principles.

Option B, traditional Active Directory password policies without MFA, is insufficient for healthcare security. Password-only authentication cannot prevent credential theft, phishing, or account compromise. Static policies do not evaluate risk signals or enforce adaptive controls, leaving sensitive patient data exposed and non-compliant with HIPAA regulations.

Option C, VPN access limited to corporate IP ranges, provides only network-level security and does not evaluate device health, risk signals, or user behavior. Compromised credentials could still allow unauthorized access within allowed IP ranges. VPN-only solutions do not integrate with cloud applications or centralized governance, making them insufficient for healthcare compliance.

Option D, local accounts with complex passwords and no monitoring, is highly insecure. Local accounts cannot enforce adaptive policies, monitor activity, or provide audit logs. Even with strong passwords, unauthorized access can occur, leaving patient data at risk. This method is unsuitable for healthcare organizations requiring regulatory compliance and secure remote access.

Question33:

A global enterprise wants to enforce least-privilege access and regularly review user permissions across hybrid and cloud applications. Which solution provides the most scalable and compliant approach?

A) Microsoft Entra ID entitlement management with access reviews
B) Manual spreadsheets tracking user permissions
C) VPN access control lists updated quarterly
D) Local accounts with ad hoc permission audits

Answer:
A

Explanation:

Option A, Microsoft Entra ID entitlement management with access reviews, provides the most scalable and compliant solution for enforcing least-privilege access. Entitlement management allows administrators to create access packages mapped to specific roles and resources, with automated assignment, approval workflows, and dynamic provisioning. Access reviews ensure that user permissions remain appropriate, removing unnecessary or outdated access. Automation reduces administrative burden, prevents orphaned accounts, and mitigates the risk of excessive privileges, which could lead to unauthorized access. Integration with cloud applications provides centralized monitoring, auditing, and reporting to support compliance with regulations such as GDPR, HIPAA, and SOX. Enterprises can maintain least-privilege principles at scale across hybrid and cloud environments while ensuring operational efficiency, security, and governance. Periodic reviews provide transparency and accountability, demonstrating regulatory compliance and strengthening security posture.

Option B, manual spreadsheets tracking user permissions, is error-prone and does not scale for large enterprises. Manual updates are labor-intensive, subject to human error, and lack real-time enforcement. Spreadsheets cannot integrate with cloud applications or provide auditing, making compliance demonstration challenging.

Option C, VPN access control lists updated quarterly, only controls network access and does not manage application-level permissions. Quarterly updates are insufficient for dynamic roles, leaving users with excessive privileges for long periods. ACLs do not provide centralized monitoring, auditing, or reporting.

Option D, local accounts with ad hoc permission audits, is inefficient and insecure. Manual audits are irregular and error-prone. Local accounts cannot integrate with cloud applications, provide centralized control, or scale across large organizations, exposing sensitive resources to risk.

Question34:

An enterprise wants to enable secure collaboration with external partners while maintaining access control and monitoring usage. Which solution is most suitable?

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

Answer:
A

Explanation:

Option A, Microsoft Entra B2B collaboration with Conditional Access and access reviews, is most suitable for secure external collaboration. B2B collaboration allows external partners to access resources via centralized identity management. Conditional Access evaluates risk signals, device compliance, and user behavior, enforcing adaptive policies like multi-factor authentication or blocking high-risk access. Access reviews ensure that external collaborators retain access only as long as necessary, reducing the risk of unauthorized exposure. This solution provides audit logs and reporting to support regulatory compliance, scales efficiently across multiple partners and projects, and reduces administrative overhead. Enterprises can maintain security while enabling productive collaboration, ensuring sensitive resources remain protected without obstructing partner engagement.

Option B, SharePoint on-premises with unrestricted sharing links, is insecure. Open links bypass authentication and risk evaluation, granting uncontrolled access. There is no auditing, time-bound access, or compliance enforcement, increasing the risk of data leaks.

Option C, manual email approvals for each document, introduces some control but is inefficient and error-prone. It does not scale for frequent collaborations and lacks automated monitoring, auditing, or periodic access review, making it inadequate for secure external collaboration.

Option D, local accounts for external collaborators without monitoring, is impractical and insecure. Manual account management is labor-intensive, cannot scale, and provides no centralized policy enforcement or audit logging. External users may retain access unnecessarily, increasing the risk of exposure.

Question35:

A multinational enterprise wants to implement a cloud-native zero-trust security model for 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 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 implementing a cloud-native zero-trust security model. Conditional Access evaluates multiple risk signals, including user identity, device compliance, location, and behavioral anomalies, to enforce adaptive access policies. Identity Protection continuously monitors for compromised accounts, unusual sign-ins, and high-risk activities. Device compliance ensures that only secure, approved endpoints can access corporate resources. This approach embodies zero-trust principles, where no user or device is trusted by default, and access is granted based on continuous risk assessment. Adaptive controls, such as MFA or access blocking, are applied dynamically according to detected risks. Detailed auditing, reporting, and monitoring enable compliance with regulatory requirements and provide visibility into enterprise security posture. By integrating identity protection, adaptive access, and device compliance, organizations achieve end-to-end protection across hybrid and cloud environments while maintaining secure productivity for global workforces.

Option B, traditional Active Directory password policies, provides limited security. Password policies alone cannot detect high-risk behavior, enforce adaptive access, or ensure device compliance. This static approach is insufficient for zero-trust and cannot scale across cloud applications.

Option C, VPN access restricted to corporate networks, offers network-level security but does not evaluate user identity, device risk, or behavioral anomalies. Compromised credentials or insecure devices within permitted networks could still access applications, violating zero-trust principles.

Option D, local accounts with manual provisioning, is highly insecure and not scalable. Manual account management does not provide centralized monitoring, auditing, or adaptive policy enforcement, leaving enterprise resources vulnerable and failing to support a zero-trust model.

Question36:

A multinational enterprise wants to implement adaptive identity and access management to protect sensitive corporate data across cloud and on-premises applications. Which solution provides the most comprehensive 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
D) Local accounts with complex passwords and manual provisioning

Answer:
A

Explanation:

Option A, Microsoft Entra ID Conditional Access with Identity Protection and device compliance, provides the most comprehensive solution for adaptive identity and access management. Conditional Access evaluates multiple signals during each sign-in attempt, including user identity, device health, geolocation, and behavioral anomalies. Identity Protection continuously monitors for suspicious activity, such as unusual login patterns, compromised credentials, and high-risk sign-ins. Device compliance ensures that only secure, managed endpoints are allowed to access sensitive resources. By integrating these components, organizations can enforce dynamic, risk-aware access policies that adapt in real time to potential threats, reducing the likelihood of unauthorized access. This cloud-native solution scales efficiently across hybrid and multi-cloud environments, supports zero-trust principles, and maintains operational productivity by allowing low-risk users to access resources seamlessly. The centralized management console provides detailed monitoring, reporting, and auditing, enabling organizations to comply with regulatory standards and demonstrate security governance. Enterprises can implement automated remediation for high-risk scenarios, such as enforcing multi-factor authentication or blocking access, minimizing human error and response delays. This adaptive approach ensures continuous protection across all applications while maintaining usability for legitimate users.

Option B, traditional Active Directory password expiration policies, provides only static, reactive security. Password expiration schedules do not assess real-time risk or user behavior and cannot enforce adaptive controls such as multi-factor authentication. Password-only approaches are vulnerable to phishing, credential theft, and replay attacks. This method is inadequate for modern cloud environments and does not support centralized monitoring or reporting for compliance purposes.

Option C, VPN access restricted to corporate IP ranges, offers network-level controls but does not evaluate user identity, device compliance, or behavioral anomalies. Threat actors with stolen credentials could still access resources from permitted networks. VPN restrictions do not provide adaptive enforcement or audit logging, leaving critical assets exposed. VPN-only solutions also do not integrate with cloud-native applications, limiting their effectiveness in hybrid environments.

Option D, local accounts with complex passwords and manual provisioning, is highly insecure and operationally inefficient. Manual account management is labor-intensive, error-prone, and cannot scale for large organizations. Complex passwords alone do not prevent unauthorized access, and local accounts cannot enforce adaptive, risk-based policies or centralized monitoring. This approach does not align with zero-trust principles and leaves enterprise resources vulnerable.

Question37:

A healthcare organization wants to allow clinicians to access cloud applications remotely while ensuring compliance with HIPAA and preventing unauthorized access. 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 MFA
C) VPN access restricted to corporate networks
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 secure remote access in healthcare. Conditional Access evaluates each sign-in attempt based on user identity, device compliance, geolocation, and detected risk signals. Adaptive responses, such as multi-factor authentication, access blocking, or password resets, are enforced for high-risk sign-ins. Device compliance ensures that only secure, approved endpoints can access sensitive healthcare data, including electronic health records and patient information. Risk-based policies adapt dynamically to detect compromised accounts, unusual activity, or behavioral anomalies, minimizing the likelihood of unauthorized access. This approach aligns with HIPAA regulations by providing continuous monitoring, audit trails, and reporting for compliance verification. Clinicians can securely access applications remotely, enabling telehealth, hybrid workflows, and patient care while maintaining strong security controls. Adaptive enforcement ensures minimal disruption for legitimate users while providing robust protection against high-risk access attempts, supporting zero-trust principles and maintaining operational efficiency.

Option B, traditional Active Directory password policies without MFA, is insufficient for healthcare security. Password-only authentication cannot prevent credential theft, phishing, or account compromise. Static policies do not assess real-time risk or enforce adaptive controls, leaving sensitive patient data exposed and non-compliant with HIPAA.

Option C, VPN access restricted to corporate networks, provides network-level security but cannot evaluate device compliance, user behavior, or risk signals. Compromised credentials could allow unauthorized access within permitted IP ranges. VPN-only solutions do not integrate with cloud applications, audit logs, or regulatory compliance requirements, making them insufficient for healthcare security.

Option D, local accounts with complex passwords and no monitoring, is highly insecure. Manual account management cannot enforce adaptive policies or provide centralized monitoring. Even with strong passwords, unauthorized access is possible, making this approach unsuitable for healthcare organizations requiring secure cloud access and regulatory compliance.

Question38:

A global enterprise wants to enforce least-privilege access and review user permissions regularly across cloud applications. Which solution provides the most scalable and compliant approach?

Answer:
A

Explanation:

Option A, Microsoft Entra ID entitlement management with access reviews, is the most scalable and compliant solution for enforcing least-privilege access. Entitlement management allows administrators to create access packages mapped to specific roles and resources, with automated assignment, approval workflows, and dynamic provisioning. Access reviews periodically verify that users retain only the permissions necessary for their current roles, removing outdated or unnecessary access. Automation reduces administrative overhead, prevents orphaned accounts, and mitigates the risk of over-privileged users. Integration with cloud applications provides centralized monitoring, auditing, and reporting, ensuring compliance with regulations such as GDPR, HIPAA, and SOX. Enterprises can maintain least-privilege principles across hybrid and cloud environments while supporting operational efficiency and governance. Periodic reviews enhance accountability, transparency, and security posture, enabling organizations to demonstrate compliance effectively.

Option B, manual spreadsheets tracking user permissions, is error-prone and does not scale. Manual updates are labor-intensive, prone to mistakes, and do not provide real-time enforcement. Spreadsheets lack integration with cloud applications and do not generate audit logs, making compliance verification difficult.

Option C, VPN access control lists updated quarterly, provides network-level access control but does not manage application-level permissions. Quarterly updates are insufficient for dynamic environments, leaving users with excessive access for extended periods. ACLs do not provide centralized monitoring, auditing, or reporting.

Option D, local accounts with ad hoc permission audits, is inefficient and insecure. Audits are irregular and unreliable. Local accounts cannot integrate with cloud applications or provide centralized monitoring, leaving sensitive resources at risk.

Question39:

An enterprise wants to enable secure collaboration with external partners while controlling access and monitoring usage for compliance. Which solution is most suitable?

Answer:
A

Explanation:

Option A, Microsoft Entra B2B collaboration with Conditional Access and access reviews, is most suitable for secure and compliant external collaboration. B2B collaboration integrates external partners into the organization’s directory while maintaining centralized identity management. Conditional Access evaluates risk signals, device compliance, and user behavior, enforcing adaptive policies such as multi-factor authentication or access blocking for high-risk sign-ins. Access reviews ensure that external collaborators retain access only as long as necessary, reducing the risk of unauthorized exposure. Audit logs and reporting support regulatory compliance. This solution scales efficiently across multiple partners and projects, reduces administrative overhead, and ensures that sensitive resources remain protected without hindering productivity. Enterprises can securely collaborate with external users while maintaining governance, transparency, and operational efficiency.

Option B, SharePoint on-premises with unrestricted sharing links, is insecure. Open links bypass authentication and access controls, granting uncontrolled access. There is no auditing, time-bound access, or compliance enforcement, increasing the likelihood of data exposure and regulatory violations.

Option C, manual email approvals for each external document, introduces limited control but is inefficient and error-prone. It does not scale for frequent collaborations and lacks automated monitoring, auditing, or periodic access reviews.

Option D, local accounts for external collaborators without monitoring, is impractical and insecure. Manual account management cannot scale, enforce centralized policies, or provide audit trails. External users may retain access unnecessarily, increasing the risk of exposure.

Question40:

A multinational enterprise wants to implement a cloud-native zero-trust security model for identity and access management across all applications and devices. Which solution provides the most comprehensive coverage?

Answer:
A

Explanation:

Option A, Microsoft Entra ID Conditional Access with Identity Protection and device compliance, provides the most comprehensive coverage for implementing a cloud-native zero-trust security model. Conditional Access evaluates risk signals such as user identity, device compliance, geolocation, and behavioral anomalies to enforce adaptive access policies. Identity Protection continuously monitors for compromised accounts, unusual sign-ins, and high-risk activity. Device compliance ensures that only secure and approved endpoints can access corporate resources. This solution aligns with zero-trust principles, granting access based on continuous risk assessment rather than implicit trust. Adaptive controls, such as multi-factor authentication or access blocking, are applied dynamically depending on risk levels. Centralized monitoring, auditing, and reporting support regulatory compliance and provide visibility into enterprise security posture. By integrating identity protection, adaptive access, and device compliance, enterprises achieve end-to-end security across hybrid and cloud environments while enabling secure productivity for global workforces.

Option B, traditional Active Directory password policies, provides limited protection. Password-only policies cannot detect high-risk activity, enforce adaptive access, or ensure device compliance. This static approach is insufficient for zero-trust and cannot scale across cloud applications.

Option C, VPN access restricted to corporate networks, offers network-level security but does not evaluate identity, device compliance, or behavioral risk. Threat actors with compromised credentials or insecure devices within permitted networks could still access applications, violating zero-trust principles.

Question41:

A multinational enterprise wants to implement adaptive access policies to continuously evaluate user behavior, device compliance, and geolocation to protect sensitive cloud applications. Which solution provides the most effective security?

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

Answer:
A

Explanation:

Option A, Microsoft Entra ID Conditional Access with Identity Protection and device compliance, is the most effective solution for adaptive access and continuous risk evaluation. Conditional Access allows the organization to enforce policies based on multiple real-time signals, such as user identity, device compliance, location, and login behavior. Identity Protection monitors for unusual activity, compromised accounts, or risky sign-ins, enabling immediate adaptive responses such as multi-factor authentication, access blocking, or password resets. Device compliance ensures that only secure, managed endpoints can access sensitive applications, minimizing the risk of unauthorized access. This approach aligns with zero-trust principles, ensuring that no user or device is implicitly trusted. By integrating risk evaluation, adaptive enforcement, and device compliance, the solution provides comprehensive security across cloud and hybrid environments, maintains operational efficiency for legitimate users, and supports compliance with regulatory standards. Centralized reporting and auditing allow IT teams to monitor access, detect patterns, and respond proactively to threats, reducing the likelihood of security incidents and data breaches. Adaptive controls are dynamic, scaling with enterprise needs, providing continuous monitoring, and automatically enforcing policy changes based on risk assessment. This cloud-native, integrated solution is essential for modern enterprises facing evolving cyber threats, ensuring end-to-end protection while maintaining usability for global workforces.

Option B, traditional Active Directory password expiration policies, is insufficient for adaptive security. Password changes are static and periodic, failing to detect or respond to suspicious activity in real time. This approach does not enforce multi-factor authentication or device compliance, leaving cloud applications vulnerable to phishing, credential theft, or compromised accounts. It is reactive rather than proactive and cannot provide centralized monitoring, risk evaluation, or compliance reporting.

Option C, VPN access restricted to static corporate IP ranges, provides network-level control but lacks adaptive, identity-based security. Users with stolen credentials could still access applications from permitted IP addresses. VPN restrictions do not assess device compliance, user behavior, or risk levels, and they do not integrate with cloud-native applications for centralized governance or reporting. This approach does not scale efficiently for global enterprises and cannot enforce zero-trust principles.

Option D, local accounts with complex passwords and manual provisioning, is highly insecure and operationally inefficient. Manual account management is labor-intensive and error-prone, and complex passwords alone cannot prevent unauthorized access. Local accounts cannot enforce adaptive policies, evaluate risk, or provide centralized auditing. This method does not support scalable, modern security frameworks and leaves enterprise resources vulnerable.

Question42:

A healthcare organization wants to enable clinicians to securely access cloud applications remotely while ensuring compliance with HIPAA. Which solution provides the strongest protection?

Answer:
A

Explanation:

Option A, Microsoft Entra ID Conditional Access with device compliance and risk-based policies, provides the strongest protection for secure remote access in healthcare organizations. Conditional Access evaluates each sign-in attempt based on user identity, device health, geolocation, and behavioral risk signals. Adaptive responses, such as multi-factor authentication, access blocking, or password reset, are triggered for high-risk activity. Device compliance ensures that only managed and secure endpoints can access sensitive healthcare data, including electronic health records. Risk-based policies continuously adapt to detect compromised accounts or suspicious behavior, minimizing the likelihood of unauthorized access. This solution supports HIPAA compliance by providing auditing, reporting, and monitoring of access activity. Clinicians can securely access cloud applications remotely, supporting telehealth, hybrid workflows, and patient care while maintaining strict security controls. Adaptive enforcement ensures minimal friction for legitimate users while preventing high-risk access attempts, aligning with zero-trust principles.

Option C, VPN access limited to corporate IP ranges, provides network-level security but cannot assess device compliance, risk signals, or user behavior. Compromised credentials could still allow unauthorized access within permitted IP ranges. VPN-only solutions lack integration with cloud applications and auditing required for regulatory compliance.

Option D, local accounts with complex passwords and no monitoring, is highly insecure. Local accounts cannot enforce adaptive policies, monitor activity, or provide audit logs. Even with strong passwords, unauthorized access is possible, making this approach unsuitable for healthcare organizations.

Question43:

A global enterprise wants to enforce least-privilege access and regularly review user permissions across cloud applications. Which solution provides the most scalable and compliant approach?

Answer:
A

Explanation:

Option A, Microsoft Entra ID entitlement management with access reviews, is the most scalable and compliant solution for enforcing least-privilege access. Entitlement management allows administrators to create access packages mapped to specific roles and resources, with automated assignment, approval workflows, and dynamic provisioning. Access reviews ensure that users retain only the permissions necessary for their current roles, removing outdated or unnecessary access. Automation reduces administrative burden, prevents orphaned accounts, and mitigates the risk of excessive privileges. Integration with cloud applications provides centralized monitoring, auditing, and reporting, ensuring compliance with regulations such as GDPR, HIPAA, and SOX. Enterprises can maintain least-privilege principles across hybrid and cloud environments while supporting operational efficiency and governance. Periodic reviews enhance transparency, accountability, and security posture, enabling organizations to demonstrate compliance and enforce appropriate access consistently.

Option B, manual spreadsheets tracking user permissions, is error-prone and does not scale for large organizations. Manual updates require significant effort, are prone to human error, and do not provide real-time enforcement. Spreadsheets cannot integrate with cloud applications or generate audit logs, making regulatory compliance verification difficult.

Option C, VPN access control lists updated quarterly, provide network-level control only and do not manage application-level permissions. Quarterly updates are insufficient for dynamic environments, leaving users with excessive privileges for long periods. ACLs do not provide centralized monitoring, auditing, or reporting, limiting their effectiveness in enforcing least privilege.

Question44:

An enterprise wants to enable secure collaboration with external partners while maintaining access control and compliance monitoring. Which solution is most suitable?

Answer:
A

Explanation:

Option A, Microsoft Entra B2B collaboration with Conditional Access and access reviews, is most suitable for secure and compliant external collaboration. B2B collaboration integrates external partners into the organization’s directory while maintaining centralized identity management. Conditional Access evaluates risk signals, device compliance, and user behavior, enforcing adaptive policies such as multi-factor authentication or blocking access for high-risk sign-ins. Access reviews ensure that external collaborators retain access only as long as necessary, reducing the likelihood of unauthorized exposure. Audit logs and reporting support regulatory compliance. This solution scales efficiently across multiple partners and projects, reduces administrative overhead, and ensures that sensitive resources remain protected without hindering productivity. Enterprises can securely collaborate with external users while maintaining governance, transparency, and operational efficiency.

Option B, SharePoint on-premises with unrestricted sharing links, is insecure. Open links bypass authentication and access controls, providing uncontrolled access. There is no auditing, time-bound access, or compliance enforcement, increasing the risk of data exposure and regulatory violations.

Option C, manual email approvals for each external document, introduces some control but is inefficient and error-prone. It does not scale for frequent collaborations and lacks automated monitoring, auditing, or access reviews.

Question45:

Answer:
A

Explanation:

Option A, Microsoft Entra ID Conditional Access with Identity Protection and device compliance, provides the most comprehensive coverage for implementing a cloud-native zero-trust security model. Conditional Access evaluates risk signals including user identity, device compliance, geolocation, and behavioral anomalies to enforce adaptive access policies. Identity Protection continuously monitors for compromised accounts, unusual sign-ins, and high-risk activities. Device compliance ensures that only secure, approved endpoints can access corporate resources. This approach aligns with zero-trust principles, granting access based on continuous risk assessment rather than implicit trust. Adaptive controls, such as multi-factor authentication or access blocking, are applied dynamically depending on risk levels. Centralized monitoring, auditing, and reporting support regulatory compliance and provide visibility into enterprise security posture. By integrating identity protection, adaptive access, and device compliance, enterprises achieve end-to-end protection across hybrid and cloud environments while enabling secure productivity for global workforces.

Option B, traditional Active Directory password policies, provides limited protection. Password-only policies cannot detect high-risk behavior, enforce adaptive access, or ensure device compliance. This static approach is insufficient for zero-trust and cannot scale across cloud applications.

Option C, VPN access restricted to corporate networks, offers network-level security but does not evaluate identity, device compliance, or behavioral risk. Compromised credentials or insecure devices within permitted networks could still access applications, violating zero-trust principles.

Option A: Microsoft Entra ID Conditional Access with Identity Protection and device compliance

Microsoft Entra ID Conditional Access combined with Identity Protection and device compliance represents the most robust approach for enforcing a cloud-native zero-trust security model. This combination does not rely on static, implicit trust but instead continuously evaluates every access request against multiple dynamic risk signals. Conditional Access policies can analyze a variety of factors including the user’s identity, their login behavior, device health, location, network state, and even the sensitivity of the resource being accessed. By doing so, it implements a context-aware decision-making framework where access is only granted when the risk profile aligns with organizational policies.

Identity Protection adds an additional layer of security by actively monitoring for suspicious activity. It detects signs of compromised accounts, unusual sign-in patterns, brute-force attempts, impossible travel scenarios, or other anomalous behaviors that might indicate account compromise. When such risks are detected, Identity Protection can automatically enforce policies such as requiring multi-factor authentication (MFA), temporarily blocking access, or prompting for password resets. This capability ensures that risky activity does not go unnoticed and provides organizations with automated mitigation mechanisms, reducing reliance on manual security interventions.

Device compliance is another critical pillar in this model. It ensures that only endpoints that meet predefined security standards—such as updated operating systems, encrypted drives, up-to-date antivirus software, and security patches—are allowed to access enterprise resources. This prevents insecure or unmanaged devices from becoming vectors for breaches. By combining identity verification, behavioral risk assessment, and device compliance, enterprises achieve an end-to-end security posture that aligns with zero-trust principles. Furthermore, this approach supports hybrid environments, integrating both on-premises applications and cloud resources under a unified security framework.

In addition to security enforcement, this approach provides centralized visibility and auditing. Security teams can track all sign-in attempts, policy triggers, and device compliance results in real time. This transparency supports regulatory compliance, forensic analysis, and ongoing risk assessment, while also enabling proactive improvements to security policies. Organizations can therefore ensure that sensitive data remains protected without unnecessarily hindering user productivity, creating a balance between security and operational efficiency.

Option B: Traditional Active Directory password policies

Traditional Active Directory password policies are a legacy method for securing accounts primarily through complexity requirements, password expiration intervals, and lockout thresholds. While these policies serve as a foundational security measure, they are static in nature and focus solely on credential management. They cannot evaluate the risk associated with the context of a login attempt, such as unusual geolocations, device anomalies, or high-risk user behavior. Consequently, if a password is compromised, these policies are ineffective at preventing unauthorized access.

Additionally, traditional password policies do not provide visibility into user behavior or device health, and they cannot enforce adaptive security controls such as multi-factor authentication based on risk scores. For cloud and hybrid environments, this becomes a significant limitation, as users may access enterprise resources from diverse locations and devices outside the corporate network. Without continuous monitoring and adaptive responses, enterprises relying solely on password policies remain vulnerable to credential-based attacks, phishing, and other modern threats.

Furthermore, password policies alone do not scale well for global organizations. Manual enforcement, helpdesk interventions for resets, and fragmented management across multiple environments create operational inefficiencies and potential security gaps. In contrast to a dynamic zero-trust model, password-only policies rely on static protections that are no longer sufficient to safeguard modern digital assets.

Option C: VPN access restricted to corporate networks

VPN access provides a layer of network-level security by creating an encrypted tunnel between the user and the enterprise network. Restricting access to corporate networks can limit exposure to external threats and help protect sensitive data from casual interception. However, VPNs assume that users and devices within the network can be implicitly trusted. This assumption is directly contrary to zero-trust principles, which mandate that no entity should be trusted by default, whether inside or outside the network.

A compromised credential or insecure device connecting through a VPN can still access enterprise resources without additional verification. VPNs typically do not assess the user’s identity risk, device compliance, or behavioral anomalies during each session. They also do not adapt access based on contextual factors such as time, location, or risk score. As a result, while VPNs provide encryption and network access control, they do not deliver comprehensive protection in cloud-native environments where applications may be accessed from anywhere on any device.

Operationally, VPNs can also introduce performance bottlenecks, increase latency, and require additional management overhead. Scaling VPN access for a distributed workforce often involves complex infrastructure changes and careful monitoring, further highlighting that network restrictions alone are insufficient to implement a modern zero-trust strategy.

Option D: Local accounts with manual provisioning

Local accounts with manual provisioning represent the least secure and least scalable option for enterprise access management. Manual account creation and maintenance require significant administrative effort and are prone to human error. There is typically no centralized control, auditing, or monitoring of account activity, which creates a high risk for misconfigured permissions, orphaned accounts, or unauthorized access.

Local accounts are often isolated from broader enterprise identity management, meaning that security policies such as password complexity, expiration, or MFA enforcement cannot be uniformly applied. They also do not integrate with cloud applications, making them unsuitable for hybrid or cloud-first environments. Without centralized monitoring, it is nearly impossible to detect suspicious login attempts, compromised accounts, or policy violations in real time.

Moreover, this approach does not provide dynamic access control based on risk context. Users are granted permissions manually and typically retain them until explicitly revoked. This static model leaves sensitive resources exposed to insider threats, compromised credentials, or unapproved device access. Organizations relying on manual provisioning struggle with operational inefficiency, inconsistent security enforcement, and limited visibility, making this approach incompatible with zero-trust security requirements.

Microsoft SC-100 Cybersecurity Architect Exam Dumps and Practice Test Questions Set 3 Q31-45

Related posts: