Microsoft SC-200 Microsoft Security Operations Analyst Exam Dumps and Practice Test Questions Set 7 Q121-140

Visit here for our full Microsoft SC-200 exam dumps and practice test questions.

Question 121:

Your organization wants to enforce MFA only for high-risk sign-ins, while allowing normal sign-ins without additional authentication. Which solution should you implement?

A) Azure AD Identity Protection
B) Azure AD Conditional Access
C) Microsoft Cloud App Security
D) Microsoft Information Protection

Answer: A) – Azure AD Identity Protection

Explanation:

Azure AD Identity Protection enables organizations to detect and mitigate sign-in risks in real time. The solution continuously analyzes sign-in attempts, using behavioral analytics, threat intelligence, and machine learning to assign risk scores. High-risk sign-ins may include scenarios such as impossible travel, unfamiliar locations, suspicious IP addresses, or compromised credentials.

Administrators can configure sign-in risk policies that enforce MFA or block access only when the system detects a high-risk sign-in. This allows normal sign-ins from familiar locations and devices to proceed without additional friction, balancing security with productivity. Additionally, user risk policies can require password resets or identity verification for accounts flagged as compromised.

Integration with Azure AD Conditional Access allows adaptive enforcement, combining contextual conditions like device compliance or location with risk-based policies. Detailed audit logs provide visibility into risk events, policy enforcement, and remediation actions, which is critical for compliance and security investigations.

Other solutions are less effective for this scenario. Conditional Access enforces policies based on device, location, or group membership but does not dynamically adjust based on risk. MCAS monitors activity but cannot enforce risk-based MFA. Microsoft Information Protection protects content but does not manage authentication or account risk.

In practice, Azure AD Identity Protection provides organizations with continuous monitoring of user accounts and sign-in activity to detect potential risks before they result in account compromise. By leveraging Microsoft’s threat intelligence, behavioral analytics, and machine learning, Identity Protection can identify suspicious activities such as sign-ins from unfamiliar locations, impossible travel events, unfamiliar devices, and leaked credentials. When such risks are detected, administrators can enforce automated mitigation actions, including requiring multi-factor authentication, initiating password resets, or temporarily blocking access until verification is completed. This proactive approach significantly reduces the likelihood of account takeovers and ensures sensitive resources remain secure.

Identity Protection works in conjunction with Conditional Access to enable adaptive authentication policies. Low-risk sign-ins from trusted devices, familiar locations, or compliant endpoints may proceed without interruption, while high-risk attempts trigger MFA challenges or additional verification steps. This ensures that security interventions are applied where they are most needed, focusing protective measures on accounts that pose the greatest risk. By targeting MFA and other safeguards to risky sign-ins, organizations maintain usability for legitimate users, minimizing disruption to daily workflows while ensuring critical resources are protected.

Beyond real-time mitigation, Identity Protection provides reporting and auditing capabilities that allow administrators to review trends in risky sign-ins, monitor remediated accounts, and assess the effectiveness of their risk-based policies. Security teams can gain insights into high-risk activity, unusual login patterns, and accounts that may require additional attention. Integration with tools such as Microsoft Sentinel or other SIEM systems enables centralized visibility, alerting, and streamlined incident response, helping organizations react quickly to emerging threats.

By combining continuous monitoring, early detection, and adaptive mitigation, Azure AD Identity Protection strengthens the security posture of organizations while balancing operational efficiency. It ensures that high-risk events are addressed promptly, sensitive data and applications are safeguarded, and legitimate users experience minimal friction. This intelligence-driven, risk-based approach provides both proactive protection and operational flexibility, enabling organizations to maintain security in cloud and hybrid environments while supporting a seamless user experience.

Question 122:

Your organization wants to prevent sensitive financial spreadsheets from being shared outside the company while allowing internal collaboration. Which solution should you implement?

A) Microsoft Information Protection
B) Azure AD Conditional Access
C) Microsoft Cloud App Security
D) Microsoft Defender for Endpoint

Answer: A) – Microsoft Information Protection

Explanation:

Microsoft Information Protection (MIP) allows organizations to classify, label, and protect sensitive content automatically. In this scenario, the organization wants to prevent external sharing of financial spreadsheets, while maintaining access for internal employees.

Administrators can define sensitive information types or custom rules that detect financial data such as bank account numbers, tax information, or corporate budget spreadsheets. Once detected, MIP applies sensitivity labels, enforcing encryption, restricting external access, and ensuring internal collaboration is preserved.

Automation ensures consistent enforcement, reducing reliance on user judgment and minimizing accidental data leaks. Detailed audit logs track access, sharing attempts, and policy enforcement, which is crucial for regulatory compliance and forensic investigations.

Other solutions are not designed for content-specific enforcement. Conditional Access manages access but does not detect sensitive content. MCAS monitors activity but does not automatically block content from leaving the organization based on sensitivity labels. Defender for Endpoint secures devices but cannot enforce content-specific restrictions.

In practice, Microsoft Information Protection (MIP) provides organizations with a robust framework to secure sensitive financial content across emails, documents, and collaborative platforms. By automatically classifying and labeling content based on predefined policies, MIP ensures that confidential information such as financial statements, budget reports, account details, and transaction records is consistently protected. Labels can enforce encryption, access restrictions, and rights management, allowing only authorized personnel to view, edit, or share sensitive data. This persistent protection remains with the content even if it is shared externally, downloaded to unmanaged devices, or stored outside the organization, minimizing the risk of accidental or malicious exposure.

MIP also integrates seamlessly with Microsoft 365 applications like Outlook, SharePoint, OneDrive, and Teams, enabling secure workflows without hindering productivity. For example, when a finance team member sends an email containing sensitive financial data, MIP can automatically encrypt the message, restrict forwarding, and require authentication for recipients. Similarly, financial documents stored in SharePoint or OneDrive can be labeled and encrypted, ensuring that only individuals with proper clearance can access them. By embedding protection directly into the content, organizations maintain a secure environment while enabling employees to collaborate efficiently and meet business objectives.

Additionally, MIP supports compliance with financial regulations and corporate governance policies, such as SOX (Sarbanes-Oxley), PCI-DSS, and regional data protection laws. The solution provides auditing and reporting capabilities that allow administrators to track who accessed or attempted to access protected financial content, detect policy violations, and generate reports for regulatory review. This visibility helps organizations demonstrate accountability and maintain strong internal controls over sensitive financial information.

By automating classification, protection, and monitoring, MIP reduces the risk of data breaches, ensures regulatory compliance, and maintains operational efficiency. It allows organizations to enforce robust financial data protection policies while supporting seamless collaboration and productivity for authorized users. Overall, MIP delivers a proactive and comprehensive approach to securing critical financial content, balancing security, compliance, and business efficiency.

Question 123:

Your organization wants to detect suspicious sign-in activity, such as impossible travel or sign-ins from unfamiliar locations, and enforce MFA for risky accounts. Which solution should you implement?

A) Azure AD Identity Protection
B) Microsoft Cloud App Security
C) Microsoft Information Protection
D) Microsoft Defender for Office 365

Answer: A) – Azure AD Identity Protection

Explanation:

Azure AD Identity Protection continuously monitors sign-ins and user accounts for risky behavior, including impossible travel, unfamiliar geographic locations, or sign-ins from compromised credentials. Each sign-in is analyzed and assigned a risk score, which allows administrators to take automated or manual remediation actions.

Administrators can define sign-in risk policies to enforce MFA or block access for high-risk sign-ins and user risk policies to require password changes for compromised accounts. Integration with Conditional Access allows these risk signals to be combined with other contextual factors such as device compliance or group membership.

Detailed logs provide visibility into risk events, enforcement actions, and remediation steps, supporting incident response, security audits, and regulatory compliance. By detecting suspicious activity early, Identity Protection reduces the likelihood of account compromise, credential theft, and insider threats.

Other solutions cannot fully implement risk-based authentication. MCAS monitors activity and detects anomalies but cannot enforce MFA for risky sign-ins. MIP classifies and protects content but does not assess account risk. Defender for Office 365 secures endpoints but cannot dynamically respond to compromised accounts.

In practice, Identity Protection ensures adaptive, risk-aware authentication, safeguarding sensitive resources while allowing legitimate users to work without unnecessary disruption. This approach strengthens security posture and reduces the potential for breaches.

Question 124:

Your organization wants to monitor user activity in Microsoft 365, detect mass downloads of sensitive content, and block unauthorized downloads in real time. Which solution should you implement?

A) Conditional Access App Control
B) Azure AD Conditional Access
C) Microsoft Information Protection
D) Microsoft Defender for Endpoint

Answer: A) – Conditional Access App Control

Explanation:

Conditional Access App Control, part of Microsoft Cloud App Security (MCAS), provides real-time monitoring and enforcement for cloud application sessions. Unlike traditional Conditional Access policies, which operate at sign-in, App Control evaluates actions during the session, enabling organizations to block or restrict specific activities based on context.

In this scenario, the organization wants to detect and prevent mass downloads of sensitive content in Microsoft 365 apps. Administrators can configure session policies that assess device compliance, user risk, location, and session behavior. When suspicious activity is detected—such as a user downloading large volumes of sensitive files from an unmanaged device—the session policy can block the downloads, alert security teams, or quarantine files automatically.

Behavioral analytics within MCAS detect unusual activity patterns, including off-hours access or bulk file movements, further enhancing threat detection. Audit logs provide detailed insights into all blocked or allowed activities, which are critical for compliance, forensics, and reporting.

Other solutions do not offer session-level enforcement. Azure AD Conditional Access can control access at sign-in but cannot restrict downloads during an active session. MIP labels and protects content but cannot dynamically block actions. Defender for Endpoint secures devices but does not enforce cloud app activity policies.

In practice, Conditional Access App Control ensures real-time protection of sensitive data, preventing accidental or malicious exfiltration while allowing legitimate workflows on compliant devices. This approach mitigates insider threats and enhances overall cloud security.

Question 125:

Your organization wants to automatically classify emails containing sensitive personal information and enforce restrictions on external sharing while allowing internal access. Which solution should you implement?

A) Microsoft Information Protection
B) Azure AD Conditional Access
C) Microsoft Cloud App Security
D) Microsoft Defender for Office 365

Answer: A) – Microsoft Information Protection

Explanation:

Microsoft Information Protection (MIP) provides organizations with the ability to classify, label, and protect sensitive content automatically. In this scenario, emails containing personally identifiable information (PII)—such as social security numbers, health records, or financial data—must be protected from unauthorized external sharing while still accessible internally.

Administrators define sensitive information types or custom detection rules that identify PII in emails, attachments, or documents. When such content is detected, MIP applies sensitivity labels that enforce encryption, restrict external access, and ensure authorized internal users maintain access. For example, if an employee attempts to email a spreadsheet containing PII externally, the email can be automatically blocked, and encrypted for internal review.

Automation ensures consistent enforcement across Microsoft 365 apps, reducing reliance on user awareness and minimizing accidental data leaks. Audit logs provide detailed insights into classification, access attempts, and policy enforcement, which are critical for regulatory compliance (GDPR, HIPAA) and incident investigations. MIP policies can also include policy exceptions for authorized workflows, allowing flexibility without compromising security.

Other solutions do not offer content-specific protection. Conditional Access controls access but does not classify or protect sensitive content. MCAS monitors activity but cannot enforce content protection at the time of sending. Defender for Office 365 protects endpoints but cannot apply content-specific restrictions.

In practice, MIP ensures robust protection of sensitive personal information, preventing accidental leaks, maintaining compliance, and enabling internal collaboration without disruption. This combination of automation, policy enforcement, and detailed auditing makes MIP an essential tool for modern information security.

Question 126:

Your organization wants to require MFA only when users access Microsoft 365 apps from high-risk sign-ins, while allowing normal sign-ins without additional authentication. Which solution should you implement?

A) Azure AD Identity Protection
B) Azure AD Conditional Access
C) Microsoft Cloud App Security
D) Microsoft Information Protection

Answer: A) – Azure AD Identity Protection

Explanation:

Azure AD Identity Protection allows organizations to automate risk detection and remediation for user accounts. High-risk sign-ins can be identified based on several criteria: impossible travel, sign-ins from unfamiliar locations, devices exhibiting suspicious behavior, or leaked credentials. Each sign-in is assigned a risk score, enabling administrators to enforce additional authentication or block access based on predefined thresholds.

For example, a sign-in from a foreign country where the user has never previously logged in may trigger a high-risk score, prompting MFA or blocking access until verification occurs. Conversely, normal sign-ins from trusted devices and locations proceed without extra friction, ensuring productivity is maintained while mitigating security risk.

Administrators can create sign-in risk policies to enforce MFA only when risk exceeds a certain threshold. User risk policies can trigger password resets or require identity verification if a compromise is suspected. Integration with Azure AD Conditional Access allows combining risk signals with contextual factors such as device compliance or location, providing adaptive, intelligent access controls.

Other solutions are less granular. Conditional Access enforces policies based on device or location but cannot dynamically adjust based on risk scores. MCAS monitors activity but cannot enforce MFA for risky sign-ins. Microsoft Information Protection focuses on content protection, not authentication.

In practice, Azure AD Identity Protection provides continuous monitoring, automated risk assessment, and adaptive enforcement, protecting accounts from compromise while minimizing disruption for legitimate users. It allows organizations to focus security measures where they are most needed, strengthening overall security posture and compliance.

Question 127:

Your organization wants to prevent sensitive financial spreadsheets from being downloaded on unmanaged devices while allowing access on corporate-compliant devices. Which solution should you implement?

A) Conditional Access App Control
B) Azure AD Conditional Access
C) Microsoft Information Protection
D) Microsoft Defender for Endpoint

Answer: A) – Conditional Access App Control

Explanation:

Conditional Access App Control, a feature of Microsoft Cloud App Security (MCAS), provides real-time session monitoring and enforcement for cloud apps. Unlike Azure AD Conditional Access, which controls access at sign-in, App Control evaluates user actions during the session, allowing fine-grained control over downloads, sharing, and other activities.

Administrators can configure session policies to prevent sensitive financial spreadsheets from being downloaded on unmanaged devices, while allowing the same activity on compliant, corporate-managed devices. The policies assess device compliance, location, user identity, and session behavior, providing dynamic protection against accidental or malicious data exfiltration.

MCAS also applies behavioral analytics, detecting anomalies such as bulk downloads or off-hours access, and can trigger automated responses like blocking downloads, alerting security teams, or terminating sessions. Audit logs capture all activity, enforcement actions, and blocked events, which is crucial for compliance, reporting, and forensic investigations.

Other solutions do not provide session-level enforcement. Azure AD Conditional Access controls access at sign-in but cannot prevent downloads during active sessions. Microsoft Information Protection labels and protects content but does not enforce dynamic session controls. Defender for Endpoint secures devices but does not monitor or block cloud app activity.

In practice, Conditional Access App Control ensures sensitive financial content is protected in real time, preventing insider threats and accidental leaks while maintaining workflow for trusted users. This combination of real-time enforcement, behavioral analytics, and audit reporting strengthens cloud security and reduces organizational risk.

Question 128:

Your organization wants to detect compromised accounts and enforce risk-based authentication such as MFA or blocking access. Which solution should you implement?

A) Azure AD Identity Protection
B) Microsoft Cloud App Security
C) Microsoft Information Protection
D) Microsoft Defender for Office 365

Answer: A) – Azure AD Identity Protection

Explanation:

Azure AD Identity Protection enables organizations to proactively detect and mitigate compromised accounts. It continuously evaluates sign-ins using behavioral analytics, threat intelligence, and machine learning. Each sign-in is assigned a risk score, factoring in unusual location, impossible travel, anomalous device usage, or compromised credentials.

Administrators can configure sign-in risk policies to require MFA or block access for high-risk sign-ins and user risk policies to enforce password resets or additional verification for compromised accounts. Integration with Conditional Access ensures that adaptive enforcement considers both contextual factors and risk signals.

For instance, a user signing in from an unfamiliar country may be prompted for MFA or have access blocked until identity verification is completed. This mitigates unauthorized access and reduces the risk of data breaches. Detailed logs capture detected risks, policy enforcement, and remediation actions for security audits, regulatory compliance, and incident response.

Other solutions are insufficient for dynamic risk enforcement. MCAS detects anomalies but cannot enforce MFA for compromised accounts. MIP protects content but does not assess or enforce account risk. Defender for Office 365 protects endpoints but cannot dynamically remediate risky sign-ins.

In practice, Identity Protection provides continuous monitoring, automated risk assessment, and adaptive response, ensuring compromised accounts are remediated quickly while minimizing disruption to legitimate users. This approach strengthens organizational security posture and prevents unauthorized access to critical resources.

Question 129:

Your organization wants to automatically classify emails containing sensitive personal information (PII) and prevent external sharing while allowing internal collaboration. Which solution should you implement?

A) Microsoft Information Protection
B) Azure AD Conditional Access
C) Microsoft Cloud App Security
D) Microsoft Defender for Office 365

Answer: A) – Microsoft Information Protection

Explanation:

Microsoft Information Protection (MIP) allows organizations to automatically classify, label, and protect sensitive content such as PII, financial information, and health data. Policies can detect sensitive content in emails, attachments, and documents using predefined sensitive information types or custom rules.

When PII is detected, sensitivity labels are applied, enforcing encryption, restrictions on external sharing, and maintaining internal access for authorized users. For example, if an employee attempts to send an email with PII to an external recipient, MIP can block the email and encrypt it for internal recipients.

Automation ensures consistent enforcement across Microsoft 365, reducing the likelihood of accidental data leaks. Detailed audit logs provide visibility into policy enforcement, access attempts, and sharing activities, supporting compliance with regulations such as GDPR, HIPAA, or internal corporate policies. Exceptions can be configured for authorized workflows without compromising overall data protection.

Other solutions are less effective. Conditional Access manages access but cannot classify content or restrict based on sensitivity. MCAS monitors activity but does not enforce content-level restrictions automatically. Defender for Office 365 secures endpoints but cannot classify or enforce PII restrictions.

In practice, MIP ensures robust protection of sensitive personal information, preventing leaks, maintaining compliance, and allowing internal collaboration without disrupting business processes. Automated classification, labeling, and policy enforcement make MIP essential for modern organizational security strategies.

Question 130:

Your organization wants to detect anomalous activity in Microsoft 365, such as mass downloads or unusual sharing, and respond in real time. Which solution should you implement?

A) Microsoft Cloud App Security
B) Azure AD Conditional Access
C) Microsoft Information Protection
D) Microsoft Defender for Endpoint

Answer: A) – Microsoft Cloud App Security

Explanation:

Microsoft Cloud App Security (MCAS) provides real-time monitoring, behavioral analytics, and anomaly detection for Microsoft 365 and other cloud applications. By establishing baseline behavior for users, it detects deviations such as mass downloads, unusual sharing, sign-ins from unfamiliar devices, or activity outside normal working hours.

Administrators can configure real-time policies that block suspicious activity, alert security teams, or quarantine files immediately. Integration with Conditional Access App Control allows session-level enforcement, considering context such as device type, user risk, and location. For example, if a user downloads hundreds of sensitive files during off-hours, MCAS can block further downloads and notify administrators instantly.

Audit logs provide comprehensive insights for compliance, investigations, and risk assessment. This proactive detection and response approach mitigates insider threats, compromised accounts, and potential data exfiltration, while still allowing legitimate users to perform their work on trusted devices.

Other solutions do not offer session-level enforcement. Conditional Access controls access at sign-in but cannot restrict actions during an active session. MIP labels content but does not detect behavioral anomalies. Defender for Endpoint secures devices but does not provide detailed cloud activity monitoring.

In practice, MCAS enables proactive detection and mitigation of threats, protecting sensitive content, maintaining compliance, and ensuring operational efficiency in cloud environments. It safeguards resources without disrupting productivity for trusted users.

Question 131:

Your organization wants to require MFA for users accessing Microsoft 365 apps only when they sign in from external networks, while allowing seamless access from corporate-managed devices. Which solution should you implement?

A) Azure AD Conditional Access
B) Security Defaults
C) Microsoft Cloud App Security
D) Microsoft Information Protection

Answer: A) – Azure AD Conditional Access

Explanation:

Azure AD Conditional Access provides adaptive, context-aware access policies for Microsoft 365 and other cloud apps. In this scenario, the organization aims to enforce MFA selectively, challenging users only when they access apps from external or untrusted networks, while allowing seamless access from trusted corporate devices to maintain productivity.

Administrators can create policies targeting specific users or groups, select target applications, and apply conditions such as location or device compliance. The control “require MFA” ensures that users signing in from outside the corporate network must complete multi-factor authentication. Internal users on managed devices bypass MFA, maintaining a frictionless experience.

Integration with Azure AD Identity Protection allows Conditional Access to leverage real-time risk signals, including leaked credentials, unusual IP addresses, or suspicious sign-ins. Policies can combine multiple conditions—for instance, requiring MFA for external users accessing sensitive apps, while exempting internal users on compliant devices.

Other solutions are less flexible. Security Defaults enforce MFA for all users without location-based exceptions. MCAS monitors activity but cannot enforce MFA at sign-in. Microsoft Information Protection classifies and protects content but does not control authentication.

In practice, Conditional Access ensures risk-based authentication, protecting sensitive resources from external threats while maintaining productivity for trusted users. For example, a user accessing Teams from home or a coffee shop is challenged for MFA, while the same user on a corporate laptop in the office accesses Teams seamlessly. This adaptive security approach balances usability with security, minimizing risk without impeding legitimate workflow.

Question 132:

Your organization wants to prevent sensitive financial spreadsheets from being shared outside the company while allowing internal collaboration. Which solution should you implement?

A) Microsoft Information Protection
B) Azure AD Conditional Access
C) Microsoft Cloud App Security
D) Microsoft Defender for Endpoint

Answer: A) – Microsoft Information Protection

Explanation:

Microsoft Information Protection (MIP) enables organizations to automatically classify, label, and protect sensitive content. In this scenario, the goal is to prevent external sharing of financial spreadsheets while allowing internal collaboration.

Administrators can configure sensitive information types or custom rules to detect financial data such as bank account numbers, invoices, or budget spreadsheets. Once detected, MIP applies sensitivity labels that enforce encryption, restrict external access, and maintain internal collaboration.

Automation ensures consistent policy enforcement, reducing reliance on user judgment and preventing accidental data leaks. Detailed audit logs track document access, sharing attempts, and policy enforcement, supporting regulatory compliance and reporting requirements.

Other solutions do not offer content-specific enforcement. Conditional Access controls access but cannot detect sensitive content. MCAS monitors activity but cannot automatically block content from leaving based on sensitivity labels. Defender for Endpoint protects devices but cannot dynamically control content actions.

In practice, MIP ensures robust protection of sensitive financial data, allowing authorized users to collaborate internally while preventing unauthorized external access. This maintains productivity without compromising security or compliance requirements.

Question 133:

Your organization wants to detect compromised accounts and enforce risk-based authentication such as MFA or block access. Which solution should you implement?

A) Azure AD Identity Protection
B) Microsoft Cloud App Security
C) Microsoft Information Protection
D) Microsoft Defender for Office 365

Answer: A) – Azure AD Identity Protection

Explanation:

Azure AD Identity Protection provides organizations with continuous monitoring and automated risk assessment for user accounts. Each sign-in is evaluated using machine learning, behavioral analytics, and threat intelligence to assign a risk score. Factors include impossible travel, unfamiliar sign-in locations, anomalous devices, or leaked credentials.

Administrators can create sign-in risk policies to require MFA or block access for high-risk sign-ins. User risk policies can trigger password resets or identity verification for accounts suspected of compromise. Integration with Conditional Access allows combining contextual conditions such as device compliance or group membership with risk signals for adaptive, intelligent enforcement.

For example, if a user signs in from a foreign country, Identity Protection can prompt for MFA or block access until identity verification occurs. Detailed audit logs provide visibility into risk events, policy enforcement, and remediation steps, supporting compliance, incident response, and forensic investigations.

Other solutions are less effective. MCAS monitors activity but cannot enforce MFA for risky accounts. MIP protects content but does not evaluate account risk. Defender for Office 365 secures endpoints but cannot dynamically respond to compromised accounts.

In practice, Identity Protection ensures early detection and mitigation of compromised accounts, reducing the likelihood of unauthorized access while maintaining usability for legitimate users. This adaptive security approach strengthens organizational security posture and supports compliance with internal and regulatory standards.

Question 134:

Your organization wants to automatically classify emails containing sensitive personal information (PII) and enforce restrictions on external sharing while allowing internal access. Which solution should you implement?

A) Microsoft Information Protection
B) Azure AD Conditional Access
C) Microsoft Cloud App Security
D) Microsoft Defender for Office 365

Answer: A) – Microsoft Information Protection

Explanation:

Microsoft Information Protection (MIP) enables organizations to classify, label, and protect sensitive content automatically. Policies can detect emails containing personally identifiable information (PII), such as social security numbers, health information, or financial data. Once detected, MIP applies sensitivity labels that enforce encryption, block external sharing, and maintain internal access for authorized personnel.

Automation ensures consistent policy enforcement across Microsoft 365 apps, minimizing accidental data leaks and reducing reliance on user judgment. Detailed audit logs provide insight into classification, access, and enforcement, supporting regulatory compliance, forensic investigations, and internal policy adherence.

Exceptions can be configured for authorized workflows, allowing necessary business operations without compromising overall security. Other solutions are less suitable. Conditional Access manages access but cannot classify content. MCAS monitors activity but does not automatically enforce content-level protection. Defender for Office 365 protects endpoints but cannot classify or restrict sensitive emails.

In practice, MIP ensures robust protection of sensitive personal information, preventing data leaks, maintaining compliance, and enabling secure internal collaboration. Automated labeling, encryption, and enforcement reduce risk while allowing legitimate business processes to continue.

Question 135:

Your organization wants to detect anomalous activity in Microsoft 365, such as mass downloads or unusual sharing, and respond in real time. Which solution should you implement?

A) Microsoft Cloud App Security
B) Azure AD Conditional Access
C) Microsoft Information Protection
D) Microsoft Defender for Endpoint

Answer: A) – Microsoft Cloud App Security

Explanation:

Microsoft Cloud App Security (MCAS) provides behavioral analytics, anomaly detection, and real-time monitoring for Microsoft 365 and other cloud applications. By establishing baseline activity for users, MCAS can detect deviations from normal behavior, including mass downloads, unusual sharing, access from unfamiliar devices, or off-hours activity.

Administrators can configure real-time session policies that block suspicious actions, alert security teams, or quarantine files. Integration with Conditional Access App Control enables session-level enforcement based on user identity, device compliance, or location. For example, if a user downloads hundreds of sensitive files outside normal working hours, MCAS can immediately block further downloads and notify administrators.

Audit logs provide detailed insights for compliance reporting, risk assessment, and forensic investigations. The solution also mitigates insider threats and potential account compromises, protecting sensitive content while allowing legitimate users to work efficiently on trusted devices.

Other solutions are less comprehensive. Conditional Access enforces access at sign-in but cannot monitor ongoing activity. MIP labels content but does not detect behavioral anomalies. Defender for Endpoint secures devices but does not provide cloud activity monitoring.

In practice, MCAS enables organizations to proactively detect and respond to threats in cloud environments, safeguarding sensitive data, maintaining regulatory compliance, and ensuring operational efficiency. Real-time anomaly detection ensures that security risks are mitigated before data loss occurs.

Question 136:

Your organization wants to require MFA for users accessing Microsoft 365 apps from risky locations or unfamiliar devices, while allowing seamless access from trusted corporate devices. Which solution should you implement?

A) Azure AD Conditional Access
B) Security Defaults
C) Microsoft Cloud App Security
D) Microsoft Information Protection

Answer: A) – Azure AD Conditional Access

Explanation:

Azure AD Conditional Access enables organizations to enforce adaptive access policies based on contextual signals, such as user identity, device compliance, network location, and sign-in risk. In this scenario, the organization aims to require MFA for users accessing Microsoft 365 apps from risky locations or unfamiliar devices, while providing seamless access for corporate-managed and trusted devices.

Administrators can define policies targeting specific users or groups, choose target applications, and apply conditions such as location or device state. The control “require MFA” can be applied selectively so that users signing in from high-risk locations, or devices that are not compliant, are prompted for MFA, while internal users on managed devices bypass this additional step.

Integration with Azure AD Identity Protection allows Conditional Access to leverage real-time risk signals, such as leaked credentials, unfamiliar IP addresses, or anomalous sign-in patterns. This combination ensures adaptive enforcement, reducing security risk while maintaining productivity.

Other solutions are less flexible. Security Defaults enforce MFA globally without considering location or device risk. MCAS monitors session activity but does not enforce MFA at sign-in. Microsoft Information Protection labels and encrypts content but does not control authentication.

In practice, Conditional Access provides adaptive, risk-based authentication, allowing organizations to protect sensitive resources from external threats while ensuring seamless user experiences on trusted devices. For example, a user signing in from a public Wi-Fi hotspot will be challenged for MFA, whereas the same user on a corporate laptop in the office will sign in effortlessly. This approach balances security, usability, and productivity.

Question 137:

Your organization wants to prevent sensitive corporate documents from being downloaded on unmanaged devices, while allowing internal users on compliant devices to continue working. Which solution should you implement?

A) Conditional Access App Control
B) Azure AD Conditional Access
C) Microsoft Information Protection
D) Microsoft Defender for Endpoint

Answer: A) – Conditional Access App Control

Explanation:

Conditional Access App Control, part of Microsoft Cloud App Security (MCAS), provides real-time monitoring and enforcement for cloud application sessions. Unlike standard Conditional Access, which controls access at sign-in, App Control evaluates actions during the session, enabling administrators to block downloads, sharing, or copy/paste actions based on contextual conditions.

In this scenario, session policies can prevent sensitive corporate documents from being downloaded on unmanaged devices while allowing authorized users on compliant corporate devices to access and work with the same content. Conditions include device compliance, location, session risk, and user identity.

MCAS applies behavioral analytics to detect unusual activity patterns, such as bulk downloads or off-hours file access, and can trigger automated responses like blocking downloads, alerting administrators, or quarantining files. Audit logs provide detailed documentation of session activity, enforcement actions, and policy compliance for regulatory or internal investigations.

Other solutions do not provide this level of enforcement. Azure AD Conditional Access controls access at sign-in but cannot prevent downloads during an active session. Microsoft Information Protection labels and encrypts content but does not dynamically enforce session restrictions. Defender for Endpoint secures devices but does not control cloud app activities.

In practice, Conditional Access App Control ensures sensitive data is protected in real time, preventing accidental or malicious data exfiltration while maintaining productivity for authorized users on compliant devices. This approach strengthens cloud security and reduces insider and external threats.

Question 138:

Your organization wants to detect compromised user accounts and enforce risk-based actions, such as requiring MFA or blocking access. Which solution should you implement?

A) Azure AD Identity Protection
B) Microsoft Cloud App Security
C) Microsoft Information Protection
D) Microsoft Defender for Office 365

Answer: A) – Azure AD Identity Protection

Explanation:

Azure AD Identity Protection enables organizations to continuously monitor user accounts and sign-in activity to detect compromise and mitigate risks. Each sign-in and account is evaluated using machine learning, behavioral analytics, and threat intelligence to assign a risk score, which helps determine whether additional authentication or access restrictions are required.

Administrators can configure sign-in risk policies to enforce MFA or block access for high-risk sign-ins, and user risk policies to require password resets or identity verification for accounts deemed compromised. Integration with Conditional Access allows risk-based policies to be combined with contextual conditions such as location or device compliance.

For example, if a user signs in from an unusual geographic location, Identity Protection can trigger MFA or block access until the user verifies their identity. Detailed audit logs track all detected risks, enforcement actions, and remediation steps, supporting security investigations, compliance reporting, and regulatory audits.

Other solutions are less effective. MCAS monitors activity but cannot enforce MFA for compromised accounts. MIP protects content but does not detect or remediate account risks. Defender for Office 365 secures endpoints and email but cannot respond to compromised accounts dynamically.

In practice, Identity Protection provides proactive monitoring, automated risk assessment, and adaptive enforcement, safeguarding accounts from compromise while minimizing friction for legitimate users. This ensures that high-risk sign-ins are mitigated quickly, reducing exposure to unauthorized access and enhancing organizational security posture.

Question 139:

Your organization wants to automatically classify emails containing sensitive personal information and enforce restrictions on external sharing while allowing internal access. Which solution should you implement?

A) Microsoft Information Protection
B) Azure AD Conditional Access
C) Microsoft Cloud App Security
D) Microsoft Defender for Office 365

Answer: A) – Microsoft Information Protection

Explanation:

Microsoft Information Protection (MIP) allows organizations to classify, label, and protect sensitive content automatically, including emails containing personally identifiable information (PII) or sensitive corporate data. Policies can detect sensitive content in emails, attachments, and documents using predefined sensitive information types or custom rules.

Once PII is detected, sensitivity labels are applied to enforce encryption, block external sharing, and maintain access for authorized internal users. Automation ensures consistent enforcement across Microsoft 365 apps, reducing accidental data leaks and supporting compliance with regulations such as GDPR, HIPAA, or internal security policies.

Audit logs provide visibility into policy enforcement, access attempts, and blocked sharing actions, supporting forensic investigations and compliance reporting. Exceptions can be configured for authorized workflows, allowing necessary business operations without compromising overall security.

Other solutions do not offer content-specific automated enforcement. Conditional Access controls access but cannot classify or protect content. MCAS monitors activity but does not automatically enforce restrictions based on content type. Defender for Office 365 secures endpoints but cannot classify or enforce sensitive email policies.

In practice, MIP ensures robust protection of sensitive emails, preventing leaks while maintaining internal collaboration and operational efficiency. Automated labeling, encryption, and policy enforcement strengthen security while reducing reliance on user awareness.

Question 140:

Your organization wants to detect anomalous activity in Microsoft 365, such as mass downloads or unusual sharing, and respond in real time to prevent data exfiltration. Which solution should you implement?

A) Microsoft Cloud App Security
B) Azure AD Conditional Access
C) Microsoft Information Protection
D) Microsoft Defender for Endpoint

Answer: A) – Microsoft Cloud App Security

Explanation:

Microsoft Cloud App Security (MCAS) provides behavioral analytics, anomaly detection, and real-time session monitoring across Microsoft 365 and other cloud applications. By establishing a baseline for normal user behavior, MCAS detects deviations such as mass downloads, unusual sharing patterns, or sign-ins from unknown devices.

Administrators can configure real-time session policies to block suspicious activity, alert security teams, or quarantine files immediately. Integration with Conditional Access App Control allows session-level enforcement, considering user identity, device compliance, or network location. For example, if a user downloads hundreds of sensitive files outside normal business hours, MCAS can immediately block further downloads and notify security teams.

Audit logs provide detailed insights into all activities, blocked actions, and policy enforcement events, supporting compliance reporting, risk assessment, and forensic investigations. This real-time monitoring mitigates insider threats, compromised accounts, and accidental data exfiltration, while allowing legitimate users to continue working on trusted devices.

Other solutions are less comprehensive. Conditional Access enforces access at sign-in but cannot monitor ongoing activity. MIP labels content but does not detect behavioral anomalies. Defender for Endpoint secures devices but does not provide session-level monitoring of cloud activity.

In practice, MCAS enables organizations to proactively detect and respond to cloud security threats, protecting sensitive content, ensuring compliance, and maintaining operational efficiency. Real-time anomaly detection reduces risk exposure while supporting productivity for trusted users.