Go through Microsoft SC-900 exam questions and exam dumps

killexams.com supports many up-and-comers to finish the tests and get their Certifications. We have countless successful tributes. Our SC-900 questions and answers are trustworthy, legitimate, and refreshed. killexams.com SC-900 Free PDF are the most recent refreshed and legitimate to work in genuine SC-900 test. All the essential information is incorporated for contenders to breeze through SC-900 test with our Question Bank.

Exam Code: SC-900 Practice exam 2022 by Killexams.com team
SC-900 Microsoft Security, Compliance, and Identity Fundamentals

Exam Number: exam SC-900
Exam Name : Microsoft Security, Compliance, and Identity Fundamentals

Exam TOPICS

The content of this exam was updated on July 26, 2021. Please obtain the exam skills outline below to see what changed.
Describe the concepts of security, compliance, and identity (10-15%)
Describe the capabilities of Microsoft identity and access management solutions (30-35%)
Describe the capabilities of Microsoft security solutions (35-40%)
Describe the capabilities of Microsoft compliance solutions (25-30%)

Describe the Concepts of Security, Compliance, and Identity (10-15%)
Describe security and compliance concepts & methodologies
 describe the Zero-Trust methodology
 describe the shared responsibility model
 define defense in depth
 describe common threats
 describe encryption
 describe cloud adoption framework
Define identity concepts
 define identity as the primary security perimeter
 define authentication
 define authorization
 describe what identity providers are
 describe what Active Directory is
 describe the concept of Federated services
 define common Identity Attacks
Describe the capabilities of Microsoft Identity and Access Management
Solutions (30-35%)
Describe the basic identity services and identity types of Azure AD
 describe what Azure Active Directory is
 describe Azure AD identities (users, devices, groups, service principals/applications)
 describe what hybrid identity is
 describe the different external identity types (Guest Users)
Describe the authentication capabilities of Azure AD
 describe the different authentication methods
 describe self-service password reset
 describe password protection and management capabilities
 describe Multi-factor Authentication
 describe Windows Hello for Business
Describe access management capabilities of Azure AD
 describe what conditional access is
 describe uses and benefits of conditional access
 describe the benefits of Azure AD roles
Describe the identity protection & governance capabilities of Azure AD
 describe what identity governance is
 describe what entitlement management and access reviews is
 describe the capabilities of PIM
 describe Azure AD Identity Protection
Describe the capabilities of Microsoft Security Solutions (35-40%)
Describe basic security capabilities in Azure
 describe Azure Network Security groups
 describe Azure DDoS protection
 describe what Azure Firewall is
 describe what Azure Bastion is
 describe what Web Application Firewall is
 describe ways Azure encrypts data
Describe security management capabilities of Azure
 describe the Azure Security center
 describe Azure Secure score
 describe the benefit and use cases of Azure Defender - previously the cloud workload
protection platform (CWPP)
 describe Cloud security posture management (CSPM)
 describe security baselines for Azure
Describe security capabilities of Azure Sentinel
 define the concepts of SIEM, SOAR, XDR
 describe the role and value of Azure Sentinel to provide integrated threat protection
Describe threat protection with Microsoft 365 Defender
 describe Microsoft 365 Defender services
 describe Microsoft Defender for Identity (formerly Azure ATP)
 describe Microsoft Defender for Office 365 (formerly Office 365 ATP)
 describe Microsoft Defender for Endpoint (formerly Microsoft Defender ATP)
 describe Microsoft Cloud App Security
Describe security management capabilities of Microsoft 365
 describe the Microsoft 365 Defender portal
 describe how to use Microsoft Secure Score
 describe security reports and dashboards
 describe incidents and incident management capabilities
Describe endpoint security with Microsoft Intune
 describe what Intune is
 describe endpoint security with Intune
 describe the endpoint security with the Microsoft Endpoint Manager admin center
Describe the Capabilities of Microsoft Compliance Solutions (25-30%)
Describe the compliance management capabilities in Microsoft
 describe the offerings of the Service Trust portal
 describe Microsoft’s privacy principles
 describe the compliance center
 describe compliance manager
 describe use and benefits of compliance score
Describe information protection and governance capabilities of Microsoft 365
 describe data classification capabilities
 describe the value of content and activity explorer
 describe sensitivity labels
 describe Retention Polices and Retention Labels
 describe Records Management
 describe Data Loss Prevention
Describe insider risk capabilities in Microsoft 365
 describe Insider risk management solution
 describe communication compliance
 describe information barriers
 describe privileged access management
 describe customer lockbox
Describe the eDiscovery and audit capabilities of Microsoft 365
 describe the purpose of eDiscovery
 describe the capabilities of the content search tool
 describe the core eDiscovery workflow
 describe the advanced eDiscovery workflow
 describe the core audit capabilities of M365
 describe purpose and value of Advanced Auditing
Describe resource governance capabilities in Azure
 describe the use of Azure Resource locks
 describe what Azure Blueprints is
 define Azure Policy and describe its use cases

Microsoft Security, Compliance, and Identity Fundamentals
Microsoft Fundamentals exam contents
Killexams : Microsoft Fundamentals exam contents - BingNews https://killexams.com/pass4sure/exam-detail/SC-900 Search results Killexams : Microsoft Fundamentals exam contents - BingNews https://killexams.com/pass4sure/exam-detail/SC-900 https://killexams.com/exam_list/Microsoft Killexams : The Two Sides of Microsoft: Strong Fundamentals vs. Insiders' Selling Activity

First published on Simply Wall St News

Summary:

  • MSFT has superior fundamentals, including a 36.7% profit margin, estimated earnings growth of 11% p.a.

  • Analysts and our valuation model suggest that the company has 43% and 37% upside, respectively.

  • Insider selling activity warrants a more cautious approach when analyzing the company, as there are likely things insiders understand better about the business.

Microsoft (NASDAQ:MSFT) lost 19.4% of its market cap despite exhibiting some strong fundamental qualities. The company seems to be growing the top line, as well as scaling margins. We analyzed the company to see if the decline is warranted for the $1.7t market cap stock and came up with some mixed results.

Check out our latest analysis for Microsoft

Evaluating The Fundamentals

If we look at our company report, we find a number of quality markers that are rare in other companies. Here is a rundown of Microsoft's key fundamental benefits:

Trading at 37.3% Below Our Estimate of Its Fair Value

Using a discounted cash flow valuation model, we estimate that the company's intrinsic value is worth $2.7t. It seems that the price of risk has been pressuring the stock in the past year. However, the free cash flows are expected to grow to between $125b and $150b in the next decade, which could potentially make the stock attractive again once market risk settles down.

Earnings Grew by 18.7% YoY, and are Forecasted to Grow 11.33% Annually

Microsoft has a solid track-record of earnings growth in the past. The company has successful projects internally with the cloud growth, as well as executing well on growth by acquisitions such as the LinkedIn back in 2016.

The chart below illustrates the successful growth story for Microsoft:

msft-growh

The company has also managed to scale the net profit margin from 28.3% in 2019 to 36.7% in the last 12 months. Producing higher profits while growing revenue is a hallmark sign of value creation.

Trading at Good Value vs. the Peer Average Price-To-Earnings Ratio

Microsoft's peers are trading at an average price to earnings ratio of 19.7x, while the company is currently trading at a 23.9x PE. As earnings are expected to grow 11.3% in the next 12 months, this brings the forward PE to 23x. A PE above 17.4x implies a premium on the 5-year market average, but may be justified given the size and stability of Microsoft.

Analysts in Good Agreement for a 43.3% Upside

The average 1-year price target for Microsoft is $333.8 per share, and the 42 analysts covering the company seem to be in good agreement, with less than a 15% spread between estimates. The chart below shows that analysts are still bullish on the stock's performance:

msft-price-targets

In summary, we can see that Microsoft's fundamentals have a wide margin and are expected to keep growing in the future. Analysts are also in agreement that the stock price has been underperforming, which is in-line with our valuation estimates.

However, there are some things that the fundamentals can't tell us, and we can use other sources to double-check our assumptions.

A Wedge in the Story

In general, we want to see congruence between a company's fundamentals and the trading activity of people who know the stock inside-out. The assumption is that these insiders know more about the future of a business than analysts who have limited access to information.

When insiders are selling or buying stock in their company, it is always a good signal to pay attention to. We always expect a certain amount of insider activity, but ideally we would like that activity to be random, and disconnected with the movement of the stock. However, when we have an insider such as the CEO Satya Nadella, top ticking $285m worth of shares, at an average of $349 per share, we start wondering if this is a result of his judgement on the business potential. To be clear, the selling decision may have also been made for other reasons such as the anticipation of a worsened macro environment, which evidently happened after 2021.

Looking at the big picture, we see that Microsoft insiders sold more than they bought over the last year.

You can see the insider transactions (by companies and individuals) over the last year, depicted in the chart below. If you click on the chart, you can see all the individual transactions, including the share price, individual, and the date!

insider-trading-volume

If this dampens your interest, you can check out the other side of the spectrum with this free list of growing companies that insiders are buying.

The last three months saw significant insider selling at Microsoft. In total, insiders dumped $21m worth of shares in that time, and we didn't record any purchases whatsoever. This may suggest that some insiders think that the shares are not cheap.

Conclusion

While the fundamentals remain strong for Microsoft, it seems that the macro environment may be keeping both investors and insiders on the sidelines for the stock. When analyzing a stock like Microsoft, we want to see consistency between the fundamentals, investors' expectations on risk and the behavior of top management.

If you preferred to check out other companies, then do not miss this free list of interesting companies, that have HIGH return on equity and low debt.

For the purposes of this article, insiders are those individuals who report their transactions to the relevant regulatory body. We currently account for open market transactions and private dispositions, but not derivative transactions.

Have feedback on this article? Concerned about the content? Get in touch with us directly. Alternatively, email editorial-team@simplywallst.com

Simply Wall St analyst Goran Damchevski and Simply Wall St have no position in any of the companies mentioned. This article is general in nature. We provide commentary based on historical data and analyst forecasts only using an unbiased methodology and our articles are not intended to be financial advice. It does not constitute a recommendation to buy or sell any stock and does not take account of your objectives, or your financial situation. We aim to bring you long-term focused analysis driven by fundamental data. Note that our analysis may not factor in the latest price-sensitive company announcements or qualitative material.

Join A Paid User Research Session
You’ll receive a US$30 Amazon Gift card for 1 hour of your time while helping us build better investing tools for the individual investors like yourself. Sign up here

Mon, 03 Oct 2022 02:18:00 -0500 en-US text/html https://www.aol.com/news/two-sides-microsoft-strong-fundamentals-133216200.html
Killexams : ‘We don’t teach developers how to write secure software’ – Linux Foundation’s David A Wheeler on reversing the CVE surge

Teach devs security fundamentals to bolster supply chain resilience, argues Wheeler

Coding school

Addressing a decades-old deficiency in coding curriculums could have a profound effect on the security of the software supply chain, a leading expert on the subject tells The Daily Swig.

In particular, David A Wheeler, director of open source supply chain security at the Linux Foundation, draws a link between a failure to incorporate security into entry-level developer courses and the vast majority of vulnerabilities belonging to a small number of common bug classes.

The IT PhD and Certified Information Systems Security Professional (CISSP) also moonlights as adjunct professor of computer science at Virginia’s George Mason University, and in 2020 concluded a 33-year spell at the US Institute for Defense Analyses.

Daily Swig: David, can you summarize your background and what your current roles involve?

David A Wheeler: I’ve loved computers since junior high school and paid my way through school doing computer consulting. I also briefly maintained the world’s first commercial, entirely text-based multiplayer roleplaying game, Scepter of Goth.

Now I teach at George Mason University on how to develop secure software – which I’ve studied over many decades.

Most of my work is with the Open Source Security Foundation, OpenSSF [whose members include AWS, Google, and Microsoft]. I view my role as being a kind of catalyst or accelerant. I can run around as a subject matter expert to help organizations Boost the security of their software.

David Wheeler, The Linux FoundationDavid A Wheeler has studied the secure development of software for decades

DS: And what are the biggest barriers to improving application security?

DAW: The fundamental problem is that we do not teach software developers how to write secure software.

I don't care if it’s a separate course or embedded [in other coding courses] – that's not the question. The question is: when software developers are learning the basics of their craft, do they learn the basics of developing secure software? And the answer is mostly “no”.

A 2019 Forrester study found that none of the top US coding schools and none of the top five non-US computer science schools were teaching this. Another study found that only one school did – at UC, San Diego. So good for them, shame on the rest.

DS: Let’s imagine all coding schools immediately revamped their courses to incorporate security fundamentals. Would we see a steady fall in vulnerabilities as a new wave of security-savvy developers emerge?

DAW: It’s generally estimated that somewhere between 90% to 95% of all vulnerabilities are in a relatively small set of common ones [classes].

So, if you educate developers to prevent them systemically, and then use tools to find the stragglers, we can dramatically reduce by at least one order of magnitude – and maybe two – the number of vulnerabilities that actually slip out.

They can also find and fix the problems created in the past.

Right now, detection, response, and recovery is overwhelmed by the sheer number of vulnerabilities going into deployed systems, so it will be much easier to counter the attackers when vulnerabilities are much rarer. And that's really the argument of ‘shift left’ in general: the sooner you can get rid of the problems, the better.

DS: Why is security neglected in the coding curriculum given the potentially severe consequences of software vulnerabilities?

DAW: Our educational system does not always respond to societal needs. There was an open letter written by Oracle and some other folks 10, 15 years ago or so, where they basically begged universities [to educate them properly].

But sometimes they [universities] want to teach what they want to teach, and it doesn’t matter what society’s needs are.

DS: Could this partially reflect the fact that many educators learned their craft when cyber threats were less numerous and severe?

DAW: On the [early] internet people were mostly connected to folks they felt they could trust. But once you saw this growth of the internet and the worldwide web running on top of it in the 90s, then very quickly [they realized] no, you can’t just trust arbitrary computers you connect to.

But educational conservatism isn’t all bad. It’s actually sensible to teach things that have stood the test of time, which security has. The fundamental [computing] design principles have been known [about] since the 1970s.

RECOMMENDED ‘Security teams often fight against developers taking control’ of AppSec: Tanya Janca on the drive to DevSecOps adoption

DS: Might there be a commercial incentive at work that favours coding quickly over coding securely?

DAW: Maybe to some extent for the for-profits, but I think the bigger for-profit issue is that if you know how to do [secure development], you can probably earn double or triple in industry [compared to teaching]. You’re not gonna teach.

I teach, but that’s my side hustle. I enjoy teaching. George Mason University is 20 minutes from me and more connected to industry than some other universities.

DS: How do we persuade or incentivize education providers to embed security into coding courses?

DAW: I think this is a solvable problem – basically, society needs to scream more loudly.

The US spends a tremendous amount of money financing degrees, including computer science. If we’re gonna pay, maybe we could have some criteria?

DS: Could the impetus behind ‘shifting left’ or DevSecOps help persuade education providers to change emphasis?

DAW: I would like to think so, but I think it’s much more societal and industry pressure continuing over a period of time [that will make the difference].

Right now DevSecOps [is practised properly by] a minority, and we need to make sure that [secure development is practised] not just the majority, but is [a baseline] expectation [of all developers].

ddddDevelopers are not being taught general security principles – let alone how to apply them, says Wheeler

Years ago, I pushed really hard to get security added to a course on software engineering and after a lot of pressure and debate [the provider] finally added the word ‘security’ – no content, just that security might be important!

The ACM software engineering curriculum guidance at least does talk about knowing how to develop secure software, but lacks key specifics.

But I'm willing to believe that with continued emphasis we can get academia and many other organizations on board with making sure that software developers know the fundamentals.

DS: What fundamentals should newbie developers be taught?

DAW: What are the common problems? How do we prevent them in general? How do you design software so it’s less likely to be attacked? And what kind of tools can help developers to deal with that?

These general principles and the ability to apply them are important [skills] but lacking today.

Read more secure software development news

The first thing I did when I joined the Linux Foundation in 2020 as an employee was develop a course on developing secure software fundamentals. Thousands of people have now signed up.

George Mason University initially agreed to do my course every other semester, and very quickly, it's in every semester – it’s in demand.

But it’s an optional graduate course. We do need, in society, people who drill in deeper and [become experts], but we also need every developer to know the basics.

DS: How important is it that developers understand how to use security tools?

DAW: If you’re doing DevOps, you pretty much need a CI pipeline, and this is an obvious place to insert security tools. But if the developer doesn't know what they’re doing, they won’t know what the tool is telling them and what to do about it.

A fool with a tool is still a fool. They’re not stupid – it's just that no one has told them. Education and tooling go hand in hand.

The tools are going to miss things or report things that are not actually problems in context. Computer programs don’t – can’t – know the full context.

But as long as developers know which tools to use and how, then they can do [some] amazing things.

DS: Finally, anything to say on OpenSSF’s various initiatives aimed at bolstering software supply chain security?

DAW: Whether it’s industry, academia or governments, we’re all using open source software, so my first pitch would be: get involved with the OpenSSF. We would love to see more people involved.

I was deeply involved in the concise guides for developing secure software and evaluating open source software. And earlier, the OpenSSF published guides for open source projects and security researchers on [handling] coordinated [vulnerability] disclosure.

The Alpha-Omega Project has funded the Python Software Foundation and is funding Eclipse, Node... They’re announced a new partnership with Rust. They've released some tools for finding vulnerabilities – again, trying to shift left.

There’s also some funding for SBOM work, a tool for a Python library for SPDX [Software Package Data Exchange], and an [enterprise] end users working group kicking off.

RELATED Developers still struggling with security issues during code reviews, study finds

Fri, 14 Oct 2022 02:15:00 -0500 en text/html https://portswigger.net/daily-swig/we-dont-teach-developers-how-to-write-secure-software-linux-foundations-david-a-wheeler-on-reversing-the-cve-surge
Killexams : Support Fundamentals

Chat is available in English only.

Chat is currently not available. Please check back on Monday when our supported chat hours begin.

Please select from the list below to check availability.

Only chat-supported case types are listed.

Hours of operation: 24 hours per day, depending on agent availability.

Only chat-supported cases are listed.

Technical Chat Support is only available for the Backup Exec Product Family. Hours of operation: Monday-Friday: 24 hours per day.

Only chat-supported request types are listed.

Only chat-supported products are listed.

Veritas Backup Exec Technical Support is extending Chat service hours to 24 x 5 (Monday to Friday) providing enhanced flexibility for our Customers. For faster resolution, all low severity issues will be handled in chat, where business operations have not been adversely affected, or for enhancement requests. For responsive support, start a Chat now.

Only chat-supported features are listed.

Only chat-supported platforms are listed.

Wed, 31 Aug 2022 22:24:00 -0500 en-US text/html https://www.veritas.com/content/support/en_US/terms/support-fundamentals
Killexams : The Two Sides of Microsoft: Strong Fundamentals vs. Insiders' Selling Activity

First published on Simply Wall St News

Summary:

  • MSFT has superior fundamentals, including a 36.7% profit margin, estimated earnings growth of 11% p.a.

  • Analysts and our valuation model suggest that the company has 43% and 37% upside, respectively.

  • Insider selling activity warrants a more cautious approach when analyzing the company, as there are likely things insiders understand better about the business.

Microsoft (NASDAQ:MSFT) lost 19.4% of its market cap despite exhibiting some strong fundamental qualities. The company seems to be growing the top line, as well as scaling margins. We analyzed the company to see if the decline is warranted for the $1.7t market cap stock and came up with some mixed results.

Check out our latest analysis for Microsoft

Evaluating The Fundamentals

If we look at our company report, we find a number of quality markers that are rare in other companies. Here is a rundown of Microsoft's key fundamental benefits:

Trading at 37.3% Below Our Estimate of Its Fair Value

Using a discounted cash flow valuation model, we estimate that the company's intrinsic value is worth $2.7t. It seems that the price of risk has been pressuring the stock in the past year. However, the free cash flows are expected to grow to between $125b and $150b in the next decade, which could potentially make the stock attractive again once market risk settles down.

Earnings Grew by 18.7% YoY, and are Forecasted to Grow 11.33% Annually

Microsoft has a solid track-record of earnings growth in the past. The company has successful projects internally with the cloud growth, as well as executing well on growth by acquisitions such as the LinkedIn back in 2016.

The chart below illustrates the successful growth story for Microsoft:

msft-growh

The company has also managed to scale the net profit margin from 28.3% in 2019 to 36.7% in the last 12 months. Producing higher profits while growing revenue is a hallmark sign of value creation.

Trading at Good Value vs. the Peer Average Price-To-Earnings Ratio

Microsoft's peers are trading at an average price to earnings ratio of 19.7x, while the company is currently trading at a 23.9x PE. As earnings are expected to grow 11.3% in the next 12 months, this brings the forward PE to 23x. A PE above 17.4x implies a premium on the 5-year market average, but may be justified given the size and stability of Microsoft.

Analysts in Good Agreement for a 43.3% Upside

The average 1-year price target for Microsoft is $333.8 per share, and the 42 analysts covering the company seem to be in good agreement, with less than a 15% spread between estimates. The chart below shows that analysts are still bullish on the stock's performance:

msft-price-targets

In summary, we can see that Microsoft's fundamentals have a wide margin and are expected to keep growing in the future. Analysts are also in agreement that the stock price has been underperforming, which is in-line with our valuation estimates.

However, there are some things that the fundamentals can't tell us, and we can use other sources to double-check our assumptions.

A Wedge in the Story

In general, we want to see congruence between a company's fundamentals and the trading activity of people who know the stock inside-out. The assumption is that these insiders know more about the future of a business than analysts who have limited access to information.

When insiders are selling or buying stock in their company, it is always a good signal to pay attention to. We always expect a certain amount of insider activity, but ideally we would like that activity to be random, and disconnected with the movement of the stock. However, when we have an insider such as the CEO Satya Nadella, top ticking $285m worth of shares, at an average of $349 per share, we start wondering if this is a result of his judgement on the business potential. To be clear, the selling decision may have also been made for other reasons such as the anticipation of a worsened macro environment, which evidently happened after 2021.

Looking at the big picture, we see that Microsoft insiders sold more than they bought over the last year.

You can see the insider transactions (by companies and individuals) over the last year, depicted in the chart below. If you click on the chart, you can see all the individual transactions, including the share price, individual, and the date!

insider-trading-volume

If this dampens your interest, you can check out the other side of the spectrum with this free list of growing companies that insiders are buying.

The last three months saw significant insider selling at Microsoft. In total, insiders dumped $21m worth of shares in that time, and we didn't record any purchases whatsoever. This may suggest that some insiders think that the shares are not cheap.

Conclusion

While the fundamentals remain strong for Microsoft, it seems that the macro environment may be keeping both investors and insiders on the sidelines for the stock. When analyzing a stock like Microsoft, we want to see consistency between the fundamentals, investors' expectations on risk and the behavior of top management.

If you preferred to check out other companies, then do not miss this free list of interesting companies, that have HIGH return on equity and low debt.

For the purposes of this article, insiders are those individuals who report their transactions to the relevant regulatory body. We currently account for open market transactions and private dispositions, but not derivative transactions.

Have feedback on this article? Concerned about the content? Get in touch with us directly. Alternatively, email editorial-team@simplywallst.com

Simply Wall St analyst Goran Damchevski and Simply Wall St have no position in any of the companies mentioned. This article is general in nature. We provide commentary based on historical data and analyst forecasts only using an unbiased methodology and our articles are not intended to be financial advice. It does not constitute a recommendation to buy or sell any stock and does not take account of your objectives, or your financial situation. We aim to bring you long-term focused analysis driven by fundamental data. Note that our analysis may not factor in the latest price-sensitive company announcements or qualitative material.

Join A Paid User Research Session
You’ll receive a US$30 Amazon Gift card for 1 hour of your time while helping us build better investing tools for the individual investors like yourself. Sign up here

Mon, 03 Oct 2022 02:18:00 -0500 en-GB text/html https://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/two-sides-microsoft-strong-fundamentals-133216200.html
SC-900 exam dump and training guide direct download
Training Exams List