AZ-305 practice question 2 of 10

Note: This section contains one or more sets of questions with the same scenario and problem. Each question presents a unique solution to the…

Full set: 396 questions

Domain Design identity, governance, and monitoring solutions

Note: This section contains one or more sets of questions with the same scenario and problem. Each question presents a unique solution to the problem. You must determine whether the solution meets the stated goals. More than one solution in the set might solve the problem. It is also possible that none of the solutions in the set solve the problem. After you answer a question in this section, you will NOT be able to return. As a result, these questions do not appear on the Review Screen. Your company, named Contoso, Ltd., has a Microsoft Entra tenant named contoso.com that uses Privileged Identity Management (PIM) and is linked to an Azure subscription named Sub1. You use Azure Backup to back up all the resources in Sub1 to a Recovery Services vault named Vault! An external company named Fabrikam, Inc. provides security management services to Contoso. Fabrikam has a Microsoft Entra tenant named fabrikam.com and an Azure subscription. You need to prevent a compromised administrator account in contoso.com from modifying backup policies in and deleting backups from Sub1. Solution: You configure a PIM role assignment that requires approval for activation by an administrator in contoso.com. Does this meet the goal?
Answer options
A: Yes
B: No Correct answer
Correct Answer:
B. No
Explanation

The proposed solution, using a Privileged Identity Management (PIM) role assignment with an approver from the same tenant (contoso.com), does not fully meet the goal. While it adds a layer of protection by requiring a second administrator's approval, it is insufficient to prevent a malicious actor who has compromised the contoso.com tenant. A sophisticated attacker could potentially compromise both the requesting administrator's account and the designated approver's account, or a compromised Global Administrator could reconfigure the PIM approval workflow. This single point of failure within the same security boundary (the contoso.com tenant) means the solution does not guarantee prevention.

Why Incorrect

A. Yes: This is incorrect because the solution fails to establish true separation of duties across different security or administrative domains. An approver within the same tenant is vulnerable to a tenant-wide compromise, thus not fully preventing the malicious action as required.

References

1. Microsoft Learn, "About multi-user authorization for Azure Backup." This document describes the recommended feature for this exact scenario. It states, "Multi-user authorization (MUA) for Azure Backup allows you to add an additional layer of protection to critical operations on your Recovery Services vaults... MUA ensures that any critical operation is performed with the authorization of two users." It achieves this using a Resource Guard in a separate subscription or tenant, creating the necessary security boundary that the proposed PIM solution lacks.

2. Microsoft Learn, "Approve or deny requests for Microsoft Entra roles in Privileged Identity Management." Section: "Approvers." This documentation details how PIM approval works. It shows that approvers are configured within the role settings. If the approver is another user within the same tenant, it does not protect against a scenario where the entire tenant's administrative accounts are at risk of compromise.

3. Microsoft Learn, "Azure Backup security features to help protect hybrid backups from attacks." Section: "Prevent attacks." This article explicitly discusses protecting against "rogue administrators" and recommends using Multi-User Authorization (MUA) with a Resource Guard as the primary mechanism to prevent unauthorized deletion of backups, highlighting that this is a stronger control than standard role-based access control configurations.

Scroll to Top