[Microsoft] SC-200 - Security Operations Analyst Assoc Exam Dumps & Study Guide

Free [Microsoft] SC-200 - Security Operations Analyst Assoc Practice Questions Preview

• Question 1

  DRAG DROP -
  You are investigating an incident by using Microsoft 365 Defender.
  You need to create an advanced hunting query to count failed sign-in authentications on three devices named CFOLaptop, CEOLaptop, and COOLaptop.
  How should you complete the query? To answer, select the appropriate options in the answer area.
  NOTE: Each correct selection is worth one point.
  Select and Place:
  
  

  Correct Answer: See interactive view.

  Explanation:

  The completed KQL query to count failed sign-in authentications on the specified devices should be:

  DeviceLogonEvents | where DeviceName in ("CFOLaptop", "CEOLaptop", "COOLaptop") and ActionType == "LogonFailed" | summarize LogonFailures=count() by DeviceName , LogonType

  Reasoning:

  The query needs to filter `DeviceLogonEvents` for failed login attempts on the devices "CFOLaptop", "CEOLaptop", and "COOLaptop".

  • `DeviceLogonEvents` specifies the table containing device logon event data.
  • `where DeviceName in ("CFOLaptop", "CEOLaptop", "COOLaptop")` filters the events to include only those originating from the specified devices.
  • `and ActionType == "LogonFailed"` filters the events further, selecting only those where the logon attempt failed. The `ActionType` field is the appropriate field to filter for logon failures, using the value "LogonFailed".
  • `summarize LogonFailures=count() by DeviceName, LogonType` groups the results by `DeviceName` and `LogonType`, counting the number of failed logons for each combination.

  Why other options are incorrect:

  • Using `FailureReason` instead of `ActionType == "LogonFailed"` is incorrect. `FailureReason` is not a valid value for filtering failed logon attempts directly within the `ActionType` field of the `DeviceLogonEvents` table. Therefore, filtering by `FailureReason` is likely to return incorrect or no results.

  In summary, the suggested query correctly filters the `DeviceLogonEvents` table for failed logon events from the specified devices and then summarizes the results to provide a count of failures by device name and logon type.

  • Microsoft Defender XDR advanced hunting schema tables, https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-365/security/defender/advanced-hunting-schema-tables?view=o365-worldwide

• Question 2

  You need to receive a security alert when a user attempts to sign in from a location that was never used by the other users in your organization to sign in.
  Which anomaly detection policy should you use?
  

  • A. Impossible travel
  • B. Activity from anonymous IP addresses
  • C. Activity from infrequent country
  • D. Malware detection

  Correct Answer: C

  Explanation:

  The recommended answer is C. Activity from infrequent country.

  Reasoning: The question asks for an anomaly detection policy that triggers when a user signs in from a location *never used by other users in the organization*. The "Activity from infrequent country" policy is specifically designed to detect login attempts originating from locations that are uncommon or new for the entire organization. This aligns directly with the requirement of the question.

  Why other options are not the best fit:

  • A. Impossible travel: This policy detects logins from geographically distant locations within a short timeframe, suggesting that it is impossible for the user to have physically traveled between those locations. This is useful, but does not directly address the question's specific need to identify locations never used by *any* user in the organization.
  • B. Activity from anonymous IP addresses: This policy detects logins originating from anonymous IP addresses (e.g., VPNs, Tor). While using anonymous IPs could be suspicious, this does not directly correlate with the location being new to the organization.
  • D. Malware detection: This policy detects malware infections based on login activities and is not related to the user's location.

  Therefore, "Activity from infrequent country" is the most appropriate choice as it directly addresses the requirement of detecting logins from locations never used by any other user in the organization, utilizing behavioral analytics and machine learning for anomaly detection.

  Citations:

  • Azure AD Identity Protection documentation - Anomaly detection policies, https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/entra/id-protection/concept-identity-protection-policies

• Question 3

  You have a Microsoft 365 subscription that uses Microsoft Defender for Office 365.
  You have Microsoft SharePoint Online sites that contain sensitive documents. The documents contain customer account numbers that each consists of 32 alphanumeric characters.
  You need to create a data loss prevention (DLP) policy to protect the sensitive documents.
  What should you use to detect which documents are sensitive?
  

  • A. SharePoint search
  • B. a hunting query in Microsoft 365 Defender
  • C. Azure Information Protection
  • D. RegEx pattern matching

  Correct Answer: D

  Explanation:

  The best approach to detect sensitive documents containing customer account numbers (32 alphanumeric characters) for a DLP policy in Microsoft 365 is to use RegEx pattern matching. Here's a detailed explanation:

  Suggested Answer: D. RegEx pattern matching

  Reasoning for choosing this answer:

  • RegEx is specifically designed for pattern recognition: RegEx (Regular Expression) is a powerful and flexible tool for defining and detecting specific patterns within text. Since the customer account numbers have a defined structure (32 alphanumeric characters), a RegEx pattern can accurately identify them.
  • DLP Policies and RegEx Integration: Data Loss Prevention (DLP) policies in Microsoft 365 allow the use of RegEx for identifying sensitive information. This makes RegEx a direct and suitable method for this scenario.
  • Precision: RegEx allows precise definition of the pattern you're looking for, reducing false positives.

  Reasons for not choosing the other answers:

  • A. SharePoint search: SharePoint search is useful for finding documents based on keywords or properties, but it is not designed for identifying specific patterns within the content of documents like alphanumeric strings. It lacks the precision needed for this task.
  • B. A hunting query in Microsoft 365 Defender: Hunting queries are useful for investigating security incidents and identifying threats. While they can search for specific strings, they are not the primary tool for defining and enforcing DLP policies based on content patterns. Hunting is a reactive, investigative measure, not a proactive prevention measure.
  • C. Azure Information Protection (AIP): Azure Information Protection (now part of Microsoft Purview Information Protection) is primarily used for labeling and classifying documents to apply protection measures. While AIP labels can trigger DLP policies, AIP itself does not detect the pattern of the data. AIP relies on methods like RegEx or keyword matching to first identify the content before applying labels. As one comment indicated, AIP is used for labeling function and not for DLP policy conditions.

  Therefore, RegEx pattern matching is the most accurate and efficient method for detecting documents containing the specified customer account number format within SharePoint Online for DLP purposes.

  • Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention (DLP), https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/purview/prevent-data-loss-overview
  • Use regular expression (regex) pattern matching in your DLP policies, https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-365/compliance/create-test-tune-dlp-policy?view=o365-worldwide#use-regular-expression-regex-pattern-matching-in-your-dlp-policies

• Question 4

  Your company uses line-of-business apps that contain Microsoft Office VBA macros.
  You need to prevent users from downloading and running additional payloads from the Office VBA macros as additional child processes.
  Which two commands can you run to achieve the goal? Each correct answer presents a complete solution.
  NOTE: Each correct selection is worth one point.
  A.
  
  B.
  
  C.
  
  D.
  
  

  Correct Answer: BC

  Explanation:

  Based on the question and discussion, the recommended answer is A and D. Reasoning for choosing A and D: Options A and D directly block the behavior of Office VBA macros from spawning child processes. The question requires preventing users from downloading and running additional payloads, which means the solution must enforce a restriction rather than just auditing. * **Option A:** This command configures Attack Surface Reduction (ASR) to block Office applications from creating child processes. This directly prevents the described malicious behavior. The `Set-MpPreference` cmdlet can be used if you're replacing existing preferences. * **Option D:** This command adds a specific ASR rule using GUID `D4F940AB-401B-4Ef8-A3D3-63C65D29412B` to block Office applications from creating child processes. This achieves the objective of preventing the execution of additional payloads. It's the recommended method when you want to add a rule to the existing ASR configuration, instead of overwriting the existing rules. Reasons for not choosing B and C: * **Options B and C:** These options set the ASR rules to Audit mode. Audit mode only logs instances where the rule would have been triggered; it doesn't prevent the behavior. The question specifically asks for a solution that *prevents* users from running additional payloads, not just monitoring when they do.

  • Attack Surface Reduction (ASR) Rules, https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-365/security/defender-endpoint/attack-surface-reduction-rules-reference?view=o365-worldwide
  • Use Attack Surface Reduction to Prevent Malware Infection, https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/security/blog/2022/03/22/attack-surface-reduction-rules-in-microsoft-defender-for-endpoint-use-attack-surface-reduction-to-prevent-malware-infection/

• Question 5

  Your company uses Microsoft Defender for Endpoint.
  The company has Microsoft Word documents that contain macros. The documents are used frequently on the devices of the company's accounting team.
  You need to hide false positive in the Alerts queue, while maintaining the existing security posture.
  Which three actions should you perform? Each correct answer presents part of the solution.
  NOTE: Each correct selection is worth one point.
  

  • A. Resolve the alert automatically.
  • B. Hide the alert.
  • C. Create a suppression rule scoped to any device.
  • D. Create a suppression rule scoped to a device group.
  • E. Generate the alert.

  Correct Answer: BDE

  Explanation:

  The correct answer is BDE. Here's a breakdown of why these options are correct and why the others are not:

  B: Hide the alert. This is correct because the primary requirement is to hide false positives from the Alerts queue. Hiding the alert directly achieves this.

  D: Create a suppression rule scoped to a device group. This is correct because the documents are used frequently on the devices of the company's accounting team. Creating a suppression rule scoped to the device group that contains the accounting team's devices ensures that the false positive alerts are suppressed only for those specific devices, thus maintaining the existing security posture for the rest of the organization. Scoping it to a device group is more targeted than suppressing it globally.

  E: Generate the alert. This is correct because before an alert can be hidden or suppressed, it must exist in the first place. Generating the alert ensures that the alert is present to be suppressed or hidden.

  A: Resolve the alert automatically. This is incorrect because resolving the alert handles the alert as a real one, which does not align with the goal of hiding false positives. Resolving would imply an action was taken, which isn't necessary when the alert is a false positive.

  C: Create a suppression rule scoped to any device. This is incorrect because scoping the rule to any device is overly broad and does not maintain the existing security posture as effectively as scoping to a specific device group. The issue is specific to the accounting team's devices; therefore, a more targeted approach is preferred.

  • Microsoft Defender for Endpoint Documentation, https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-365/security/defender-endpoint/
  • Manage alerts in Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-365/security/defender-endpoint/manage-alerts

• Question 6

  DRAG DROP -
  You open the Cloud App Security portal as shown in the following exhibit.
  
  Your environment does NOT have Microsoft Defender for Endpoint enabled.
  You need to remediate the risk for the Launchpad app.
  Which four actions should you perform in sequence? To answer, move the appropriate actions from the list of actions to the answer area and arrange them in the correct order.
  Select and Place:
  
  

  Correct Answer: See interactive view.

  Explanation:

  Based on the question and discussion, the recommended sequence of actions to remediate the risk for the Launchpad app, given that Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is NOT enabled, is as follows:

  1. Review the discovered apps.
  2. Go to the Discovered apps page.
  3. In the row in which the app you want to block appears, choose the three dots at the end of the row, and then choose Run block script.
  4. Run the block script on your appliance.

  The suggested answer is based on the fact that without Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, blocking must be done manually via a block script run on the source appliance (firewall or proxy) that initially detected the app. This is because Cloud App Security identifies risky apps through log data collected from these appliances.

  The reason for this approach is that the cloud app security console gets the information from the firewall or proxy server, and this is where the block script should be applied. The question specified that Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is not enabled, so the automatic blocking feature is unavailable, thus, a manual approach is required.

  If Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Zscaler NSS, or iboss were enabled, the app would be automatically blocked, making the script unnecessary.

  • Microsoft Cloud App Security - Governance actions for discovered apps, https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/cloud-app-security/governance-discovery

• Question 7

  HOTSPOT -
  You have a Microsoft 365 E5 subscription.
  You plan to perform cross-domain investigations by using Microsoft 365 Defender.
  You need to create an advanced hunting query to identify devices affected by a malicious email attachment.
  How should you complete the query? To answer, select the appropriate options in the answer area.
  NOTE: Each correct selection is worth one point.
  Hot Area:
  
  

  Correct Answer: See interactive view.

  Explanation:

  The recommended answer is to use Join, Extend, and Project in that order. This is because the initial query focusing on email events does not directly include device-specific information like DeviceName and DeviceId, which are essential for identifying affected devices. Therefore, we need to first Join the tables using a common key such as NetworkMessageId, then Extend the table to incorporate device information, and finally Project the desired fields for the final output.

  Here's a breakdown of the reasoning:

  • Join: The initial email-focused query lacks direct device information. Joining with another table that contains device information, linked by a common identifier (e.g., NetworkMessageId), is crucial.
  • Extend: After joining, the Extend operator is used to add new columns (DeviceName, DeviceId) or compute new values based on existing columns. This is essential for explicitly incorporating the device information into the dataset.
  • Project: Finally, the Project operator selects only the necessary columns (e.g., SenderFromAddress, RecipientEmailAddress, Subject, DeviceName, DeviceId) for the final result.

  Why other options are incorrect:

  • Using "Project" before "Extend" would likely result in an error because DeviceName and DeviceId would not yet exist in the dataset.
  • "Join, Project, Project" configurations would also lead to errors because the device information would not be properly integrated before the projection.

  This approach aligns with the Microsoft documentation example, while also addressing the need to include device information as highlighted in the discussion.

  • Microsoft 365 Defender advanced hunting query examples: https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-365/security/mtp/advanced-hunting-query-emails-devices?view=o365-worldwide

• Question 8

  You have the following advanced hunting query in Microsoft 365 Defender.
  
  You need to receive an alert when any process disables System Restore on a device managed by Microsoft Defender during the last 24 hours.
  Which two actions should you perform? Each correct answer presents part of the solution.
  NOTE: Each correct selection is worth one point.
  

  • A. Create a detection rule.
  • B. Create a suppression rule.
  • C. Add | order by Timestamp to the query.
  • D. Replace DeviceProcessEvents with DeviceNetworkEvents.
  • E. Add DeviceId and ReportId to the output of the query.

  Correct Answer: AE

  Explanation:

  The correct answers are A and E.

  Reasoning for choosing A: Creating a detection rule is necessary to trigger an alert based on the results of the advanced hunting query. The question explicitly requires receiving an alert, making this a mandatory step.

  Reasoning for choosing E: Adding DeviceId and ReportId to the output of the query is crucial for the detection rule to function correctly and provide relevant information about the alert. The DeviceId identifies the device on which the event occurred, and the ReportId provides a unique identifier for the specific event. Custom detection rules require Timestamp and ReportId columns.

  Reasoning for not choosing B: Creating a suppression rule is the opposite of what's needed; it would prevent alerts, not generate them.

  Reasoning for not choosing C: Adding | order by Timestamp to the query might be useful for analysis but is not directly related to creating the alert as required by the question. While Timestamp is important for detections, this option alone doesn't fulfill the requirement of setting up an alert.

  Reasoning for not choosing D: Replacing DeviceProcessEvents with DeviceNetworkEvents would change the scope of the query to network-related events, which is not relevant to detecting changes to System Restore. The original query specifically targets process events.

  • Microsoft 365 Defender Advanced Hunting Documentation, https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-365/security/defender/advanced-hunting-overview?view=o365-worldwide
  • Create custom detection rules, https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-365/security/defender/advanced-hunting-custom-detections?view=o365-worldwide

• Question 9

  You are investigating a potential attack that deploys a new ransomware strain.
  You have three custom device groups. The groups contain devices that store highly sensitive information.
  You plan to perform automated actions on all devices.
  You need to be able to temporarily group the machines to perform actions on the devices.
  Which three actions should you perform? Each correct answer presents part of the solution.
  NOTE: Each correct selection is worth one point.
  

  • A. Assign a tag to the device group.
  • B. Add the device users to the admin role.
  • C. Add a tag to the machines.
  • D. Create a new device group that has a rank of 1.
  • E. Create a new admin role.
  • F. Create a new device group that has a rank of 4.

  Correct Answer: ACD

  Explanation:

  The recommended answer is ACD.

  Reasoning:

  The question requires a method to temporarily group machines for automated actions during a ransomware attack investigation. Here's why ACD is the correct combination:

  • A. Assign a tag to the device group: Tagging device groups allows for easy identification and management, which is crucial during incident response. You can quickly filter and perform actions on devices belonging to the tagged group.
  • C. Add a tag to the machines: Applying a specific tag to the affected machines allows for granular control. This way, you can target only those machines that require immediate action without affecting others. This is important during an active investigation to isolate potentially compromised systems.
  • D. Create a new device group that has a rank of 1: Creating a new device group with a high rank (rank 1 implies the highest priority) ensures that policies applied to this group are enforced before others. This is critical for quickly implementing containment or remediation measures during a ransomware attack. Device group ranking helps prioritize actions, ensuring that critical devices receive immediate attention.

  Reasons for not choosing the other answers:

  • B. Add the device users to the admin role: Adding users to the admin role increases the attack surface and is a security risk, especially during an ongoing attack. This should be avoided.
  • E. Create a new admin role: Creating new admin roles doesn't directly help in grouping machines for immediate action. It's more related to user access management.
  • F. Create a new device group that has a rank of 4: Creating a device group with a lower rank (rank 4) does not prioritize actions for the affected devices. In an active attack scenario, you want the highest priority to ensure rapid response.

  Therefore, the combination of assigning a tag to the device group, adding a tag to the machines, and creating a new device group with the highest rank allows for efficient temporary grouping and prioritized action during a ransomware investigation.

  Citations:

  • Microsoft Defender for Endpoint device groups, https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-365/security/defender-endpoint/machine-groups?view=o365-worldwide

• Question 10

  Note: This question is part of a series of questions that present the same scenario. Each question in the series contains a unique solution that might meet the stated goals. Some question sets might have more than one correct solution, while others might not have a correct solution.
  After you answer a question in this section, you will NOT be able to return to it. As a result, these questions will not appear in the review screen.
  You are configuring Microsoft Defender for Identity integration with Active Directory.
  From the Microsoft Defender for identity portal, you need to configure several accounts for attackers to exploit.
  Solution: From Entity tags, you add the accounts as Honeytoken accounts.
  Does this meet the goal?
  

  • A. Yes
  • B. No

  Correct Answer: A

  Explanation:

  The recommended answer is A: Yes.

  Reasoning: The question asks if adding accounts as Honeytoken accounts from Entity tags in the Microsoft Defender for Identity portal is the correct approach to configure accounts for attackers to exploit. The documentation confirms that using Honeytoken accounts is the correct method for this purpose. Therefore, the solution meets the goal.

  There are no other options to analyze as the question is a simple Yes/No question and the documentation supports the "Yes" answer.

  Cititation:

  • Manage sensitive accounts and honeytoken accounts, https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/defender-for-identity/manage-sensitive-honeytoken-accounts