SC-900 Exam Dumps - Microsoft Security Compliance and Identity Fundamentals

In Microsoft’s identity platform, Active Directory Domain Services (AD DS) is the on-premises directory that maintains directory objects such as users, groups, and computers. Microsoft documentation describes AD DS as a service that “stores information about objects on the network and makes this information easy for administrators and users to find and use.” It further explains that AD DS contains objects like “users, groups, computers, and other resources,” and that administrators use tools such as Active Directory Users and Computers to create and manage these objects. A key object type is the computer account; Microsoft states that “a computer that’s joined to a domain has a corresponding computer account object in Active Directory” and that these accounts are created and managed within AD DS to enable secure authentication and authorization for domain-joined devices.

By contrast, mobile devices are typically enrolled and managed through Microsoft Intune/Endpoint Manager and Azure AD device objects, not created in AD DS. Likewise, SaaS applications that require modern authentication integrate with Microsoft Entra ID (Azure AD) using OpenID Connect/OAuth 2.0—not with AD DS. Line-of-business apps that rely on modern authentication are also registered in Entra ID, while AD DS supports traditional Kerberos/NTLM for domain resources. Therefore, among the options provided, the object you can create in AD DS is computer accounts.

Microsoft’s shared-responsibility model states that the cloud provider secures the cloud, while the customer secures what they put in the cloud. The Azure Security documentation explains: “Regardless of the type of deployment, you always retain responsibility for your data, endpoints, accounts, and access management.” This applies to IaaS, PaaS, and SaaS, so statement 3 is Yes because the organization is always accountable for the security of information and data.

For SaaS, Microsoft describes that customers “don’t manage or control the underlying cloud infrastructure—including network, servers, operating systems, or even individual application capabilities” and that the provider handles service maintenance and updates. In SaaS, tasks like patching or applying service packs to the application code are owned by the service provider, while the customer focuses on data, identity, and access. Therefore, statement 1 is No.

For IaaS, Microsoft notes the provider manages the physical estate: “Microsoft is responsible for the physical hosts, network, and datacenter facilities,” while the customer configures and secures the guest OS, applications, and network controls within their subscription. Thus, managing the physical network is the cloud provider’s duty, making statement 2 Yes.

These SCI principles are foundational to Microsoft Learn/Docs guidance on Azure’s shared responsibility: provider—“security OF the cloud”; customer—“security IN the cloud,” with data protection always remaining the customer’s responsibility.

Microsoft explains that Conditional Access (CA) evaluates signals and then enforces access decisions using grant and session controls: “Conditional Access policies are enforced after first-factor authentication is completed” and are used to “make access control decisions.” CA policies target users and groups—including administrators—unless explicitly excluded. Microsoft guidance recommends excluding only break-glass accounts: “Customers with Azure AD roles such as Global administrator should have at least one emergency access account excluded from policies.” This means admins are not exempt by default; they are in scope unless you configure exclusions.

CA does not manage directory role assignments; that is handled by role assignment and Privileged Identity Management (PIM). CA’s grant controls focus on access conditions: “Grant access… Require multi-factor authentication” and Microsoft lists a common baseline: “Require multi-factor authentication for all users.” Therefore, CA can require MFA to access cloud apps, but it cannot add users to Azure AD roles.

These statements from Microsoft’s SCI materials confirm the outcomes: Admins are not inherently exempt (No), CA cannot assign roles (No), and CA can force MFA for app access (Yes).

In Microsoft Defender for Cloud, the Free plan provides continuous security assessment and visibility into your posture via Secure Score and security recommendations. Microsoft explains that the free tier offers “foundational CSPM capabilities,” including recommendations and a security score (Secure score) to help you prioritize hardening tasks. Advanced features—such as vulnerability scanning for V Ms (Qualys-based), Just-In-Time (JIT) VM access, and threat protection alerts—require the enhanced/paid Defender plans (for example, Defender for Servers). Consequently, among the listed options, only Secure score is available in the free mode. This score aggregates the effect of recommendations across subscriptions and resources so you can track and improve security posture without enabling any of the paid Defender plans.

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 privacy commitments are framed as principles that include Control, Transparency, Security, Strong legal protections, No content-based targeting, and Benefits to you. Under these commitments, Microsoft emphasizes compliance with regional and sectoral laws: it provides “strong legal protections” for data and commits to handling data “in accordance with applicable laws,” including respecting local privacy and data-protection requirements and supporting cross-border transfers only as permitted by law. The principles also state Microsoft does not use customer content for advertising, and it enables customers to manage their own privacy settings and choices. Therefore:

A is false (Microsoft does collect data but minimizes and protects it).

B is false (Microsoft states no content-based targeting for customer email/chat).

C is false (Microsoft provides settings; customers control them).

D aligns with Microsoft’s principle to respect and comply with applicable local privacy laws.

Azure Blueprints allow cloud architects and central IT to define a repeatable set of Azure resources and governance artifacts—including Azure Policy assignments, role assignments (RBAC), resource groups, and ARM/Bicep templates—and then deploy them consistently across subscriptions. Microsoft’s guidance describes Blueprints as a way to “orchestrate the deployment of various resource templates and other artifacts” to establish standards, patterns, and compliance for environments at scale. This is distinct from Azure Policy, which evaluates and enforces configuration but does not package multi-artifact environments; Microsoft Sentinel and Defender are security analytics/protection services rather than provisioning frameworks. Thus, for consistent provisioning across multiple subscriptions, the prescribed solution is Azure Blueprints.

In Microsoft Purview Information Protection, pre-trained (Microsoft-provided) trainable classifiers are designed to automatically recognize specific categories of content by learning from examples rather than relying only on patterns or keywords. Microsoft’s guidance explains that trainable classifiers “look for data by learning from examples,” and that Microsoft supplies a catalog of “pre-trained classifiers that you can use immediately in your tenant.” The documentation explicitly lists content types these classifiers can recognize, including “Resumes,” along with other categories such as Source code, Threat and harassment, and more. Because they’re already trained by Microsoft, you can use them “to identify and classify items across SharePoint, OneDrive, and Exchange,” and then take actions such as auto-labeling or enforcing DLP policies based on the classifier match.

By contrast, Content explorer is a reporting tool that lets you view where sensitive info types/labels were found; it doesn’t identify resumes on its own. Activity explorer shows events like DLP policy matches over time. eDiscovery is used for legal hold, search, and review, not for semantic content identification. Therefore, to identify documents that are employee resumes, the correct Microsoft compliance feature is the pre-trained (Microsoft-provided) trainable classifier for Resumes.