SC-900 Practice Questions

No

No

Yes

Microsoft states that Communication Compliance is administered in Microsoft Purview, not the Microsoft 365 admin center. The Learn article shows configuration and policy templates “in the Microsoft Purview portal” and directs admins to “configure Communication Compliance” there, confirming the management plane is the Purview compliance portal, not the M365 admin center.

Regarding supported locations, Microsoft lists the communication channels that policies can inspect: “Microsoft Teams… Exchange Online… Viva Engage… [and] Third-party sources.” SharePoint Online is not listed among supported channels, so SharePoint content isn’t monitored by Communication Compliance policies.

Finally, Communication Compliance includes built-in workflows to address findings. The Learn page explicitly provides a Remediate step: “Remediate Communication Compliance issues you investigate by using the following options:” such as “Notify the user” and “Escalate to another reviewer.” These actions demonstrate that the solution does more than detect; it supports remediation within the Purview portal workflow.

Exact extracts (selected):

“You can choose from the following policy templates in the Microsoft Purview portal.”

“Communication Compliance policies check… Microsoft Teams… Exchange Online… Viva Engage… Third-party sources.”

“Remediate Communication Compliance issues you investigate by using the following options: Notify the user… Escalate to another reviewer.”

Microsoft’s sensitivity labels (Microsoft Purview Information Protection) support user-driven labeling: “Users can manually apply sensitivity labels to files and emails” and organizations can also configure automatic or recommended labeling. This confirms that end users are permitted to choose a label themselves when policy allows. Microsoft also clarifies the cardinality for items: “A document or email can have only a single sensitivity label applied to it at a time.” Therefore, applying multiple sensitivity labels to the same file is not supported (labels are mutually exclusive on a given item). In addition to classification, labels can enforce protection and visual markings: “When you configure a sensitivity label, you can add protection settings such as encryption and content marking (headers, footers, and watermarks).” Word, Excel, and PowerPoint honor these content markings, so a label can automatically stamp a watermark on a Word document while embedding the label metadata for persistent protection. Together, these authoritative statements from Microsoft’s SCI documentation establish the correct responses: Yes (manual application), No (only one label per file), and Yes (labels can apply watermarks).

Microsoft’s identity guidance classifies social identity services (e.g., GitHub, Google, Facebook) as cloud-based identity providers that can be used for external identities with Microsoft Entra I

D.  

Crucially, SCI materials distinguish roles: an identity provider primarily handles authentication (proving who the user is and issuing claims/tokens). Authorization—deciding what the user can do—is enforced by the application or resource (often using roles/claims from the IdP). Auditing spans multiple planes: the IdP provides sign-in and audit logs, while applications and other services maintain their own activity logs. Therefore, it is incorrect to say a central IdP “manages all modern authentication services” including authorization and auditing; those responsibilities are shared across the identity platform and the relying applications/resources.

Microsoft’s identity guidance for Azure resources states there are two kinds of managed identities: system-assigned and user-assigned. The documentation describes that a system-assigned identity is scoped to a single resource and follows its lifecycle: “A system-assigned managed identity is created in Microsoft Entra ID and is tied to the lifecycle of that Azure service instance. When the resource is deleted, Azure automatically deletes the identity.” By contrast, a user-assigned identity is reusable across resources: “A user-assigned managed identity is a standalone Azure resource… It can be assigned to one or more Azure service instances and is managed independently of the resources that use it.”

Because the scenario requires multiple Azure web apps to use the same identity, the only managed identity type that supports this sharing model is the user-assigned managed identity. This allows you to grant RBAC permissions once to the identity and then attach that same identity to several App Service instances, simplifying secretless access to Azure resources (Key Vault, Storage, SQL, etc.) and providing centralized lifecycle and rotation management. Certificates or generic service principals would reintroduce credential management, while a system-assigned identity cannot be shared across multiple apps. Therefore, a user-assigned managed identity is the correct choice.

 An external email address can be used to authenticate self-service password reset (SSPR). → Yes

 A notification to the Microsoft Authenticator app can be used to authenticate self-service password reset (SSPR). → Yes

 To perform self-service password reset (SSPR), a user must already be signed in and authenticated to Azure A

D.  

For Microsoft Entra self-service password reset (SSPR), users must register one or more authentication methods that can later be used when they forget their password or are locked out. Microsoft’s end-user guidance states that an email address option lets users configure “an alternate email address that can be used without requiring your forgotten or missing password,” and that this method is available only for password reset. In practice, this alternate address is typically a personal or external email (for example, Gmail), so using an external email to authenticate SSPR is valid.

SSPR can also use the Microsoft Authenticator app as an authentication method. Microsoft documents that Authenticator push notifications, including number matching, are supported for several scenarios, explicitly listing self-service password reset (SSPR) among them. This means a push notification to the app on the user’s device can be used to verify identity during SSPR.

Finally, SSPR is designed for situations where the user cannot sign in. Official SSPR process descriptions explain that users start from the “Can’t access your account?” or password-reset page, provide their username, and then use their registered methods to prove identity. They do not need to be already authenticated to Azure AD; SSPR exists precisely to recover access when sign-in fails.

Azure AD Identity Protection (now part of Microsoft Entra ID) is the Microsoft service that “automates the detection and remediation of identity-based risks.” It continuously evaluates user risk and sign-in risk using signals such as leaked credentials, atypical travel, unfamiliar sign-in properties, and malware-linked IPs. Microsoft documentation clarifies that Identity Protection “uses adaptive machine learning and heuristics to detect risky behaviors and sign-ins” and enables administrators to configure risk-based policies (for example, require MFA or block access) to automatically respond. It also provides rich investigations through risk reports so security teams can triage and remediate compromised identities. This distinctly differs from other Entra capabilities: Privileged Identity Management (PIM) governs just-in-time privileged access and role activation, while MFA is an authentication method enforced by policies. Because the service that specifically detects risk and applies automated protection based on risk is Azure AD Identity Protection, it is the correct completion for the sentence about identity risk detection and remediation.QUESTION NO: 148 HOTSPOT

Select the answer that correctly completes the sentence.

Answer: < map > < m x1= " 491 " x2= " 699 " y1= " 63 " y2= " 79 " ss= " 0 " a= " 0 " / > < /map >

In Microsoft’s SCI guidance, Insider risk management is a Microsoft Purview capability surfaced and administered from the Microsoft Purview compliance portal. The official description states that Insider risk management “helps you minimize internal risks by enabling you to detect, investigate, and act on risky activities in your organization.” Microsoft further clarifies access and configuration by directing admins to “use the Microsoft Purview compliance portal to configure and manage insider risk policies, alerts, and investigations,” and that you can “go to the Microsoft Purview compliance portal and select Insider risk management” to start. These statements place the feature squarely in the compliance plane—not the Microsoft 365 admin center (tenant-wide service management), not the Microsoft 365 Defender portal (threat protection and incident response), and not Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps (app discovery and cloud app protection). In the SCI learning path, Insider risk is consistently grouped with Microsoft Purview solutions (Information Protection, DLP, eDiscovery, and Audit), emphasizing compliance workflows, risk indicators, policy tuning, and case management. Therefore, the correct completion of the sentence “Insider risk management is configured from the” is the Microsoft Purview compliance portal, where administrators create policies, review alerts, investigate user activity timelines, and take appropriate remediation actions within a compliance-centric experience.

Microsoft Defender for Identity (formerly Azure ATP) is designed to protect on-premises identity infrastructures by analyzing signals from Active Directory Domain Services (AD DS). In Microsoft’s SCI guidance, Defender for Identity is described as a “cloud service that uses sensors installed on your domain controllers to monitor and analyze user activities and information across your on-premises Active Directory.” The sensors “collect authentication, replication, and other security-relevant events and network traffic,” enabling analytics to detect techniques such as Pass-the-Hash, Pass-the-Ticket, Golden Ticket, reconnaissance, lateral movement, and domain dominance. The product’s purpose is to surface advanced threats, compromised identities, and malicious insider actions by continuously profiling and learning from AD DS behavior and security events.

While Defender for Identity integrates with other Microsoft security solutions (for example, Microsoft 365 Defender and Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps) to enrich investigations, it does not rely on Azure Active Directory (Microsoft Entra ID) signals for its core detections, nor does it collect telemetry from Azure AD Connect itself. Instead, its foundational telemetry source is on-premises AD DS domain controllers via lightweight sensors, which provide the deep authentication and directory-service context required to identify sophisticated identity-based attacks in hybrid environments.

 Azure DDoS Protection Standard protects against man-in-the-middle (MITM) attacks. = No

 Azure DDoS Protection Standard is enabled by default in an Azure subscription. = No

 Azure DDoS Protection Standard protects against protocol attacks. = Yes

Microsoft’s security guidance for Azure states that DDoS Protection is designed to defend internet-facing resources from distributed denial-of-service events at the network and transport layers (L3/L4). The documentation explains that DDoS Protection Standard provides “adaptive, real-time tuning and automatic attack mitigation for volumetric and protocol attacks (for example, SYN/ACK floods, UDP amplification, and other L3/L4 patterns).” It further clarifies that DDoS Protection is not intended to address attacks like man-in-the-middle (MITM), which are interception/alteration threats rather than traffic-exhaustion scenarios.

Regarding enablement, Microsoft notes that Azure DDoS Protection Standard is not enabled by default. The platform provides “basic DDoS protection for all Azure public IP addresses,” but the Standard plan must be explicitly enabled on a virtual network and then applied to public IP resources in that VNet to gain its enhanced telemetry, mitigation policies, and cost-protection benefits.

Putting this together: (1) MITM is out of scope for DDoS Protection Standard → No; (2) Standard is opt-in, not automatic → No; (3) Protection against protocol attacks is a primary capability of the Standard plan → Yes.