McAfee Secure

Microsoft SC-300 Bundle

Exam Code: SC-300

Exam Name Microsoft Identity and Access Administrator

Certification Provider: Microsoft

Corresponding Certification: Microsoft Certified: Identity and Access Administrator Associate

Microsoft SC-300 Bundle $44.99
SC-300 Sample 1 SC-300 Sample 2 SC-300 Sample 3 SC-300 Sample 4 SC-300 Sample 5 SC-300 Sample 6 SC-300 Sample 7 SC-300 Sample 8 SC-300 Sample 9 SC-300 Sample 10

100% Microsoft SC-300 Guaranteed Success With Testking Training Materials

Get Real SC-300 Exam Questions & Expert Verified Answers as Experienced on the Real Exam!

  • Questions & Answers

    SC-300 Questions & Answers

    490 Questions & Answers

    The ultimate exam preparation tool, Questions & Answers mirrors the actual SC-300 exam while allowing you to hone and measure every aspect of your test-taking ability.

  • SC-300 Video Course

    SC-300 Training Course

    43 Video Lectures

    SC-300 Video Course is developed by Microsoft Professionals to help you pass the SC-300 exam.

    Description

    This course will improve your knowledge and skills required to pass Microsoft Identity and Access Administrator exam.
  • Study Guide

    SC-300 Study Guide

    599 PDF Pages

    Developed by industry experts, this 599-page guide spells out in painstaking detail all of the information you need to ace SC-300 exam.

Microsoft Identity and Access Administrator (SC-300) Practice Tests

Satisfaction Guaranteed

Money Back Guarantee

Testking provides hassle-free money back guarantee with our products. That is because we have 100% trust in the abilities of our professional and experience product team, and our record is a proof of that.

99.6% PASS RATE
Total Cost: $194.97
Bundle Price: $149.98

Purchase Individually

  • Questions & Answers

    Questions & Answers

    490 Questions

    $124.99
  • SC-300 Video Course

    Training Course

    43 Video Lectures

    $39.99
  • Study Guide

    Study Guide

    599 PDF Pages

    $29.99

Microsoft SC-300 Practice Test 41

Question 400

Select the most appropriate first configuration decision for this scenario: A team must replace a client-secret dependency in a confidential server app with a certificate-based credential.

  1. Add the approved certificate public key to the app registration and configure the server to authenticate using its private key
  2. Register the correct public client platform and use an approved interactive flow with PKCE or broker support
  3. Classify and configure allowed delegated user-consent conditions while routing sensitive scopes through administrator approval
  4. Track application credential expiry, alert owners and coordinate key rotation with application-side deployment

Explanation

Correct Answer

A:

Correct implementation. Add the approved certificate public key to the app registration and configure the server to authenticate using its private key. It meets the stated requirement: A team must replace a client-secret dependency in a confidential server app with a certificate-based credential. Acceptance evidence is: The server acquires tokens using the certificate while the deprecated secret can be removed after validation.

Incorrect Answers

B:

The client was configured to require confidential-client authentication despite being distributed as a public binary. That condition is not the problem here: The app registration has only the old client secret and no matching certificate credential. The targeted implementation is: Add the approved certificate public key to the app registration and configure the server to authenticate using its private key.

C:

The sensitive Graph scope is inadvertently classified as low impact under unrestricted user consent. That condition is not the problem here: The app registration has only the old client secret and no matching certificate credential. The targeted implementation is: Add the approved certificate public key to the app registration and configure the server to authenticate using its private key.

D:

Owners assume the app registration automatically renews uploaded certificate credentials. That condition is not the problem here: The app registration has only the old client secret and no matching certificate credential. The targeted implementation is: Add the approved certificate public key to the app registration and configure the server to authenticate using its private key.

Question 401

After a deployment under this requirement — A team must replace a client-secret dependency in a confidential server app with a certificate-based credential — administrators claim the following solution is in place: Add the approved certificate public key to the app registration and configure the server to authenticate using its private key. Which pilot finding supports that claim?

  1. An app-only token carries the expected roles claim and the API denies clients lacking that role
  2. The mobile app obtains delegated user tokens without shipping a secret in its application package
  3. The server acquires tokens using the certificate while the deprecated secret can be removed after validation
  4. The SPA completes the code exchange with its PKCE verifier and the deployed JavaScript bundles contain no reusable client secret

Explanation

Correct Answer

C:

Correct acceptance check. The server acquires tokens using the certificate while the deprecated secret can be removed after validation. This tests the intended access or synchronization boundary instead of merely checking that a setting exists.

Incorrect Answers

A:

Even if defining an application role with allowedMemberTypes Application succeeds, this does not prove the required identity-control outcome. The decisive check is: The server acquires tokens using the certificate while the deprecated secret can be removed after validation.

B:

Even if registering the correct public client platform succeeds, this does not prove the required identity-control outcome. The decisive check is: The server acquires tokens using the certificate while the deprecated secret can be removed after validation.

D:

Even if registering the browser app as an SPA with exact redirect URIs succeeds, this does not prove the required identity-control outcome. The decisive check is: The server acquires tokens using the certificate while the deprecated secret can be removed after validation.

Question 402

A change appears correct at a glance, but the requirement is still unmet: A team must replace a client-secret dependency in a confidential server app with a certificate-based credential. The key observed symptom is: Token requests using the new certificate fail with invalid client credentials. Which cause should be investigated first?

  1. The app registration has only the old client secret and no matching certificate credential
  2. The sensitive Graph scope is inadvertently classified as low impact under unrestricted user consent
  3. The app was registered as a confidential web client and relies on a browser-exposed secret
  4. The client was configured to require confidential-client authentication despite being distributed as a public binary

Explanation

Correct Answer

A:

Correct diagnosis. The app registration has only the old client secret and no matching certificate credential. This fault explains the observed failure: Token requests using the new certificate fail with invalid client credentials. The intended configuration would instead be: Add the approved certificate public key to the app registration and configure the server to authenticate using its private key.

Incorrect Answers

B:

The sensitive Graph scope is inadvertently classified as low impact under unrestricted user consent. The reported symptom instead has this cause: The app registration has only the old client secret and no matching certificate credential. The corrective action is: Add the approved certificate public key to the app registration and configure the server to authenticate using its private key.

C:

The app was registered as a confidential web client and relies on a browser-exposed secret. The reported symptom instead has this cause: The app registration has only the old client secret and no matching certificate credential. The corrective action is: Add the approved certificate public key to the app registration and configure the server to authenticate using its private key.

D:

The client was configured to require confidential-client authentication despite being distributed as a public binary. The reported symptom instead has this cause: The app registration has only the old client secret and no matching certificate credential. The corrective action is: Add the approved certificate public key to the app registration and configure the server to authenticate using its private key.

Question 403

Two teams share the same release window but not the same access policy. Team A needs: A developer must configure Microsoft Graph permissions appropriate for reading a logged-in user's profile, not reading every employee's data unattended. Team B needs: A SaaS app needs user consent only for a documented harmless delegated scope and administrator consent for elevated tenant data permissions. Which TWO implementations should be included?

  1. Add the minimum delegated Graph scope and obtain user consent or appropriate approved admin consent
  2. Define a delegated scope under Expose an API and request it from a client with appropriate user consent
  3. Register the correct public client platform and use an approved interactive flow with PKCE or broker support
  4. Add the approved certificate public key to the app registration and configure the server to authenticate using its private key
  5. Classify and configure allowed delegated user-consent conditions while routing sensitive scopes through administrator approval

Explanation

Correct Answers

A:

Correct for task 1. Add the minimum delegated Graph scope and obtain user consent or appropriate approved admin consent. This directly addresses the first requirement: A developer must configure Microsoft Graph permissions appropriate for reading a logged-in user's profile, not reading every employee's data unattended. Verify it by checking: The token shows the delegated scope and the signed-in user can read their permitted profile.

E:

Correct for task 2. Classify and configure allowed delegated user-consent conditions while routing sensitive scopes through administrator approval. This addresses the independent second requirement: A SaaS app needs user consent only for a documented harmless delegated scope and administrator consent for elevated tenant data permissions. Verify it by checking: Low-risk approved scope consent succeeds for a user but sensitive organization-wide scope requires admin action.

Incorrect Answers

B:

The API's delegated scope was never exposed or requested by the calling application. To satisfy task 1, use: Add the minimum delegated Graph scope and obtain user consent or appropriate approved admin consent. For task 2, use: Classify and configure allowed delegated user-consent conditions while routing sensitive scopes through administrator approval.

C:

The client was configured to require confidential-client authentication despite being distributed as a public binary. To satisfy task 1, use: Add the minimum delegated Graph scope and obtain user consent or appropriate approved admin consent. For task 2, use: Classify and configure allowed delegated user-consent conditions while routing sensitive scopes through administrator approval.

D:

The app registration has only the old client secret and no matching certificate credential. To satisfy task 1, use: Add the minimum delegated Graph scope and obtain user consent or appropriate approved admin consent. For task 2, use: Classify and configure allowed delegated user-consent conditions while routing sensitive scopes through administrator approval.

Question 404

The team implemented the following change: Add the minimum delegated Graph scope and obtain user consent or appropriate approved admin consent. The acceptance requirement was: A developer must configure Microsoft Graph permissions appropriate for reading a logged-in user's profile, not reading every employee's data unattended. Which observed outcome most directly proves the change works?

  1. The token shows the delegated scope and the signed-in user can read their permitted profile
  2. Users from an approved second Entra tenant sign in, while a consumer-only Microsoft account is outside the intended audience
  3. The mobile app obtains delegated user tokens without shipping a secret in its application package
  4. Low-risk approved scope consent succeeds for a user but sensitive organization-wide scope requires admin action

Explanation

Correct Answer

A:

Correct acceptance check. The token shows the delegated scope and the signed-in user can read their permitted profile. This tests the intended access or synchronization boundary instead of merely checking that a setting exists.

Incorrect Answers

B:

Even if choosing the appropriate multitenant organizational account audience for the application succeeds, this does not prove the required identity-control outcome. The decisive check is: The token shows the delegated scope and the signed-in user can read their permitted profile.

C:

Even if registering the correct public client platform succeeds, this does not prove the required identity-control outcome. The decisive check is: The token shows the delegated scope and the signed-in user can read their permitted profile.

D:

Even if classify succeeds, this does not prove the required identity-control outcome. The decisive check is: The token shows the delegated scope and the signed-in user can read their permitted profile.

Question 405

The service desk escalates the following unsuccessful identity rollout. Requirement: A developer must configure Microsoft Graph permissions appropriate for reading a logged-in user's profile, not reading every employee's data unattended. Observed: A client token has application roles but not the expected delegated scp for the logged-in flow. Which underlying misconfiguration is most consistent?

  1. The registration uses broad application permissions instead of the needed delegated user scope
  2. The API's delegated scope was never exposed or requested by the calling application
  3. The client was configured to require confidential-client authentication despite being distributed as a public binary
  4. The sensitive Graph scope is inadvertently classified as low impact under unrestricted user consent

Explanation

Correct Answer

A:

Correct diagnosis. The registration uses broad application permissions instead of the needed delegated user scope. This fault explains the observed failure: A client token has application roles but not the expected delegated scp for the logged-in flow. The intended configuration would instead be: Add the minimum delegated Graph scope and obtain user consent or appropriate approved admin consent.

Incorrect Answers

B:

The API's delegated scope was never exposed or requested by the calling application. The reported symptom instead has this cause: The registration uses broad application permissions instead of the needed delegated user scope. The corrective action is: Add the minimum delegated Graph scope and obtain user consent or appropriate approved admin consent.

C:

The client was configured to require confidential-client authentication despite being distributed as a public binary. The reported symptom instead has this cause: The registration uses broad application permissions instead of the needed delegated user scope. The corrective action is: Add the minimum delegated Graph scope and obtain user consent or appropriate approved admin consent.

D:

The sensitive Graph scope is inadvertently classified as low impact under unrestricted user consent. The reported symptom instead has this cause: The registration uses broad application permissions instead of the needed delegated user scope. The corrective action is: Add the minimum delegated Graph scope and obtain user consent or appropriate approved admin consent.

Question 406

Which implementation fits the following specific identity problem? An application obtains a signed token but its backend API returns audience invalid because it was minted for Microsoft Graph.

  1. Define a delegated scope under Expose an API and request it from a client with appropriate user consent
  2. Update the application's registered redirect URI to the exact approved HTTPS callback and test protocol matching
  3. Define and enforce an API application role and validate the app-only token's roles claim at the resource
  4. Request an access token for the custom backend API's app ID URI/scope and validate the correct audience

Explanation

Correct Answer

D:

Correct implementation. Request an access token for the custom backend API's app ID URI/scope and validate the correct audience. It meets the stated requirement: An application obtains a signed token but its backend API returns audience invalid because it was minted for Microsoft Graph. Acceptance evidence is: The backend accepts tokens with its own audience and rejects tokens addressed to Graph.

Incorrect Answers

A:

The API's delegated scope was never exposed or requested by the calling application. That condition is not the problem here: The client requests Graph scopes when calling a separate first-party backend API. The targeted implementation is: Request an access token for the custom backend API's app ID URI/scope and validate the correct audience.

B:

The application still sends the old unregistered callback URI. That condition is not the problem here: The client requests Graph scopes when calling a separate first-party backend API. The targeted implementation is: Request an access token for the custom backend API's app ID URI/scope and validate the correct audience.

C:

The API validates only token signature and ignores resource-specific role authorization. That condition is not the problem here: The client requests Graph scopes when calling a separate first-party backend API. The targeted implementation is: Request an access token for the custom backend API's app ID URI/scope and validate the correct audience.

Question 407

An auditor must verify this deployment decision: Request an access token for the custom backend API's app ID URI/scope and validate the correct audience. Its purpose was: An application obtains a signed token but its backend API returns audience invalid because it was minted for Microsoft Graph. Which test result is the strongest evidence?

  1. The backend accepts tokens with its own audience and rejects tokens addressed to Graph
  2. A token without the required role is denied while an assigned service principal can call the restricted endpoint
  3. Users from an approved second Entra tenant sign in, while a consumer-only Microsoft account is outside the intended audience
  4. The token shows the delegated scope and the signed-in user can read their permitted profile

Explanation

Correct Answer

A:

Correct acceptance check. The backend accepts tokens with its own audience and rejects tokens addressed to Graph. This tests the intended access or synchronization boundary instead of merely checking that a setting exists.

Incorrect Answers

B:

Even if define succeeds, this does not prove the required identity-control outcome. The decisive check is: The backend accepts tokens with its own audience and rejects tokens addressed to Graph.

C:

Even if choosing the appropriate multitenant organizational account audience for the application succeeds, this does not prove the required identity-control outcome. The decisive check is: The backend accepts tokens with its own audience and rejects tokens addressed to Graph.

D:

Even if adding the minimum delegated Graph scope succeeds, this does not prove the required identity-control outcome. The decisive check is: The backend accepts tokens with its own audience and rejects tokens addressed to Graph.

Question 408

During post-change review of the requirement “An application obtains a signed token but its backend API returns audience invalid because it was minted for Microsoft Graph,” an auditor observes: The backend consistently rejects tokens whose aud claim points to Microsoft Graph. Which root-cause finding would explain that symptom?

  1. The client requests Graph scopes when calling a separate first-party backend API
  2. The API validates only token signature and ignores resource-specific role authorization
  3. The API's delegated scope was never exposed or requested by the calling application
  4. The application still sends the old unregistered callback URI

Explanation

Correct Answer

A:

Correct diagnosis. The client requests Graph scopes when calling a separate first-party backend API. This fault explains the observed failure: The backend consistently rejects tokens whose aud claim points to Microsoft Graph. The intended configuration would instead be: Request an access token for the custom backend API's app ID URI/scope and validate the correct audience.

Incorrect Answers

B:

The API validates only token signature and ignores resource-specific role authorization. The reported symptom instead has this cause: The client requests Graph scopes when calling a separate first-party backend API. The corrective action is: Request an access token for the custom backend API's app ID URI/scope and validate the correct audience.

C:

The API's delegated scope was never exposed or requested by the calling application. The reported symptom instead has this cause: The client requests Graph scopes when calling a separate first-party backend API. The corrective action is: Request an access token for the custom backend API's app ID URI/scope and validate the correct audience.

D:

The application still sends the old unregistered callback URI. The reported symptom instead has this cause: The client requests Graph scopes when calling a separate first-party backend API. The corrective action is: Request an access token for the custom backend API's app ID URI/scope and validate the correct audience.

Question 409

A change board will approve one identity configuration to satisfy: An identity team must detect a certificate credential nearing expiration without assuming the application automatically renews it. Which change should it approve?

  1. Track application credential expiry, alert owners and coordinate key rotation with application-side deployment
  2. Add the approved certificate public key to the app registration and configure the server to authenticate using its private key
  3. Request an access token for the custom backend API's app ID URI/scope and validate the correct audience
  4. Define and enforce an API application role and validate the app-only token's roles claim at the resource

Explanation

Correct Answer

A:

Correct implementation. Track application credential expiry, alert owners and coordinate key rotation with application-side deployment. It meets the stated requirement: An identity team must detect a certificate credential nearing expiration without assuming the application automatically renews it. Acceptance evidence is: A staged replacement certificate works and expiry monitoring identifies the previous credential before it fails.

Incorrect Answers

B:

The app registration has only the old client secret and no matching certificate credential. That condition is not the problem here: Owners assume the app registration automatically renews uploaded certificate credentials. The targeted implementation is: Track application credential expiry, alert owners and coordinate key rotation with application-side deployment.

C:

The client requests Graph scopes when calling a separate first-party backend API. That condition is not the problem here: Owners assume the app registration automatically renews uploaded certificate credentials. The targeted implementation is: Track application credential expiry, alert owners and coordinate key rotation with application-side deployment.

D:

The API validates only token signature and ignores resource-specific role authorization. That condition is not the problem here: Owners assume the app registration automatically renews uploaded certificate credentials. The targeted implementation is: Track application credential expiry, alert owners and coordinate key rotation with application-side deployment.

Question 410

After configuring: Track application credential expiry, alert owners and coordinate key rotation with application-side deployment, an engineer performs a targeted pilot for this objective: An identity team must detect a certificate credential nearing expiration without assuming the application automatically renews it. What result constitutes a pass?

  1. A login using the registered production callback succeeds while an unregistered callback is rejected
  2. The server acquires tokens using the certificate while the deprecated secret can be removed after validation
  3. A token without the required role is denied while an assigned service principal can call the restricted endpoint
  4. A staged replacement certificate works and expiry monitoring identifies the previous credential before it fails

Explanation

Correct Answer

D:

Correct acceptance check. A staged replacement certificate works and expiry monitoring identifies the previous credential before it fails. This tests the intended access or synchronization boundary instead of merely checking that a setting exists.

Incorrect Answers

A:

Even if updating the application's registered redirect URI to the exact approved HTTPS callback succeeds, this does not prove the required identity-control outcome. The decisive check is: A staged replacement certificate works and expiry monitoring identifies the previous credential before it fails.

B:

Even if adding the approved certificate public key to the app registration succeeds, this does not prove the required identity-control outcome. The decisive check is: A staged replacement certificate works and expiry monitoring identifies the previous credential before it fails.

C:

Even if define succeeds, this does not prove the required identity-control outcome. The decisive check is: A staged replacement certificate works and expiry monitoring identifies the previous credential before it fails.