Visit here for our full Google Professional Cloud Security Engineer exam dumps and practice test questions.
Question 141
Which solution ensures Cloud Logging data cannot be exported to unauthorized destinations such as external SIEMs or third-party storage?
A) Logging query filters
B) Organization Policy: disableLogExport
C) IAM Viewer role
D) Cloud SQL firewall rules
Answer: B
Explanation:
The Organization Policy constraint disableLogExport prevents creation of log sinks that could send logs to external systems such as BigQuery datasets in other projects, Pub/Sub topics in less secure environments, or Cloud Storage buckets outside the compliance perimeter. Log exports can unintentionally expose sensitive operational data, including API calls, IAM events, and even data access logs. If misconfigured, logs could land in untrusted destinations, violating compliance standards like PCI-DSS or HIPAA) Using an Organization Policy ensures that even project owners cannot override the export restriction. IAM Viewer roles only allow reading logs, not controlling sinks. Logging filters (A) selectively view log entries but do not stop exporting. SQL firewall rules (D) are irrelevant to Logging. By enforcing disableLogExport, organizations create a strict, centralized security boundary ensuring that logs remain inside controlled monitoring environments and cannot leave accidentally or through malicious intent. This policy is widely recommended in enterprises with strong governance, SOC integration pipelines, and strict data residency requirements. It locks down one of the most overlooked but sensitive data types in cloud environments and ensures logs stay protected at scale.
The Organization Policy constraint disableLogExport prevents the creation of log sinks that could send logs to external systems, such as BigQuery datasets in other projects, Pub/Sub topics in less secure environments, or Cloud Storage buckets outside the compliance perimeter. Log exports can inadvertently expose sensitive operational data, including API calls, IAM events, and data access logs. Unlike IAM Viewer roles, which only allow reading logs, or logging query filters that only selectively view entries, this policy ensures that even project owners cannot override export restrictions. Cloud SQL firewall rules do not affect logging. Enforcing disableLogExport provides a centralized security control to keep logs protected within trusted environments and supports compliance standards like PCI-DSS and HIPAA, preventing accidental or malicious exposure of critical operational datA)
Question 142
Which method prevents Cloud Run services from being reachable from the public Internet while still allowing internal service-to-service communication?
A) Public URL with IAM binding
B) Cloud Run VPC-only ingress
C) Cloud Armor IP rules
D) NAT-enabled routing
Answer: B
Explanation:
Cloud Run’s “internal-only” ingress option ensures services are never exposed publicly. Even if users attempt to access the service over the internet, the endpoint will reject the request. IAM bindings cannot prevent network-level exposure if the endpoint is publiC) Cloud Armor cannot block all traffic before Cloud Run receives it, because Cloud Run endpoints are Google-manageD) NAT routing manages egress only. VPC-only ingress ensures Cloud Run services are callable only from internal sources, including internal load balancers, Cloud Run jobs, and authorized Cloud Run services. This ensures proper zero-trust posture and eliminates risk of internet-originated attacks.
Cloud Run’s VPC-only ingress option is designed to ensure that services remain completely internal and are never exposed to the public internet. When this option is enabled, any requests originating from the internet are automatically rejected, even if users attempt to access the service using its public endpoint. This provides a strong network-level control that cannot be overridden by IAM bindings, as IAM roles and permissions only manage access at the application or identity level and do not prevent public network exposure. Similarly, while Cloud Armor allows you to define IP-based access rules or security policies, it cannot fully block all external traffic before it reaches a Cloud Run endpoint, because the endpoint itself is managed by Google and may still accept connections before policy enforcement. NAT-enabled routing only manages outbound traffic from a service, controlling how it reaches external networks, and does not restrict inbound access. By enforcing VPC-only ingress, Cloud Run services can be accessed exclusively by internal sources, such as internal load balancers, other Cloud Run services with proper authorization, or Cloud Run jobs within the same network. This setup aligns with a zero-trust security posture, ensuring internal services are isolated, reducing the risk of internet-originated attacks, and maintaining strict control over service exposure and internal communication.
Question 143
Which tool provides real-time alerting on anomalous network traffic from Compute Engine instances, such as unusual outbound connections?
A) Cloud Build logs
B) Event Threat Detection
C) Artifact Registry scanning
D) OS Login
Answer: B
Explanation:
Event Threat Detection evaluates VPC Flow Logs and other telemetry to identify suspicious egress patterns—such as repeated connections to known malicious IPs, high-volume outbound data transfer, or communication with command-and-control infrastructure. Cloud Build logs track CI/CD activity, not network flows. Artifact scanning detects image vulnerabilities but not runtime behavior. OS Login manages SSH access. ETD provides actionable, automatic security insights to prevent data exfiltration.
Event Threat Detection is a security service that analyzes VPC Flow Logs and other telemetry data to identify suspicious network behaviors, particularly focusing on potential data exfiltration attempts. It can detect unusual egress patterns, such as repeated connections to known malicious IP addresses, unusually high volumes of outbound data transfers, or communications with command-and-control infrastructure that may indicate compromise. Unlike Cloud Build logs, which are primarily designed to track continuous integration and deployment activities and do not provide network-level visibility, ETD focuses specifically on runtime telemetry to identify real-time threats. Similarly, Artifact Registry scanning is aimed at detecting vulnerabilities within container images or packages before deployment, but it does not monitor runtime network activity or exfiltration attempts. OS Login, on the other hand, is concerned with managing SSH access to virtual machines and does not provide threat detection for network traffiC) By leveraging Event Threat Detection, organizations gain actionable insights into potentially malicious activities, enabling automated alerts and responses to mitigate risks. This proactive approach ensures that sensitive data is protected from unauthorized outbound transfers, supports compliance requirements, and strengthens the overall security posture by combining visibility, detection, and response capabilities against network-based threats in cloud environments.
Question 144
Which feature enables the verification that a Compute Engine VM’s boot components match Google-verified, tamper-resistant baselines?
A) Shielded VM Integrity Monitoring
B) Service account impersonation
C) IAM Recommender
D) Cloud Deploy pipelines
Answer: A
Explanation:
Shielded VM Integrity Monitoring ensures firmware, bootloader, and kernel components match baseline measurements. If deviations occur, potential tampering or rootkits are flaggeD) Other features do not inspect boot integrity. This ensures strong protection against persistent threats.
Shielded VM Integrity Monitoring is a critical security feature that ensures the integrity of virtual machines by continuously verifying that key components, including firmware, bootloader, and kernel, match trusted baseline measurements. By doing so, it provides early detection of potential tampering, unauthorized modifications, or the presence of rootkits that could compromise the system at a low level. This monitoring operates at the hardware and software interface, making it highly effective against persistent threats that may evade traditional security tools. In contrast, service account impersonation focuses on granting temporary access to resources and does not provide any protection for the VM’s underlying boot process. IAM Recommender is designed to analyze permission usage and suggest policy adjustments but does not address system integrity or root-level security. Cloud Deploy pipelines automate application delivery and deployment workflows but do not inspect or verify the integrity of the virtual machines on which applications run. By enforcing Shielded VM Integrity Monitoring, organizations can ensure that any deviation from a verified boot sequence is detected promptly, enabling rapid response to potential attacks. This feature strengthens the overall security posture, prevents undetected persistent threats, and provides assurance that critical systems are operating on trusted, uncompromised software and firmware, forming a foundational layer of defense in cloud environments.
Question 145
Which solution ensures that sensitive Dataflow pipelines can operate without their workers accessing the public Internet?
A) Public worker pools
B) Private Dataflow workers
C) NAT Gateway
D) DNS-over-HTTPS
Answer: B
Explanation:
Private Dataflow workers run fully isolated, using Private Google Access to reach Google APIs without public IPs. Public pools introduce egress risk. NAT still provides internet access, and DNS encryption does not enforce isolation.
Private Dataflow workers provide a secure and isolated environment for running data processing jobs in Google ClouD) These workers operate entirely within a private network and do not require public IP addresses, reducing exposure to the public internet. By leveraging Private Google Access, they can still communicate securely with Google APIs and services without traversing public networks. This isolation ensures that sensitive data and workloads remain protected from external threats, unlike public worker pools, which use publicly routable IPs and therefore increase the risk of unauthorized access or data exfiltration. While NAT gateways allow private resources to initiate outbound connections to the internet, they do not inherently isolate workloads or protect them from inbound exposure. Similarly, DNS-over-HTTPS provides encryption for DNS queries, securing the content of DNS requests, but it does not enforce network isolation or prevent public accessibility of the worker nodes themselves. By choosing private Dataflow workers, organizations can ensure that all processing occurs within a controlled, private environment, maintaining compliance and adhering to best practices for secure data processing. This setup minimizes attack surfaces, eliminates unnecessary public exposure, and provides a strong foundation for implementing zero-trust networking and data protection strategies in cloud-based analytics workflows.
Question 146
Which technology blocks attackers from escalating privileges inside a Kubernetes cluster by exploiting default Kubernetes RBAC bindings?
A) Cloud DNS
B) GKE Sandbox
C) Workload Identity + fine-grained RBAC
D) Cloud Scheduler
Answer: C
Explanation:
Workload Identity eliminates excessive node-level permissions, and fine-grained Kubernetes RBAC ensures pods only receive minimal rights. GKE Sandbox isolates workloads but does not control RBAC) DNS and Scheduler are irrelevant. This combination enforces least privilege inside clusters.
Workload Identity combined with fine-grained Kubernetes RBAC is a powerful approach to enforcing the principle of least privilege within Google Kubernetes Engine clusters. Workload Identity allows Kubernetes service accounts to impersonate Google Cloud service accounts, eliminating the need to grant broad, node-level permissions to pods. This reduces the risk of privilege escalation and ensures that each workload only has access to the resources it explicitly requires. Fine-grained Kubernetes RBAC further enforces this principle by defining precise roles and permissions at the pod or namespace level, ensuring that workloads cannot perform actions outside their intended scope. While GKE Sandbox provides strong workload isolation by running containers in a hardened environment, it does not manage access control or permissions, so it cannot replace RBAC and Workload Identity for enforcing least privilege. Cloud DNS and Cloud Scheduler are unrelated to workload access control; DNS handles domain name resolution, and Scheduler automates job execution. By using Workload Identity in combination with Kubernetes RBAC, organizations can implement strict access controls at both the cloud resource level and within the cluster itself. This approach minimizes the attack surface, reduces the risk of unauthorized access, and ensures that workloads operate under the minimum necessary permissions, supporting security best practices and compliance requirements in cloud-native environments.
Question 147
Which feature protects data stored in Cloud Storage from accidental overwrites or premature deletion?
A) Versioning only
B) Object Lifecycle management
C) Bucket Lock with retention policy
D) Flow logs
Answer: C
Explanation:
Bucket Lock enforces retention policies so even admins cannot delete or overwrite data until the retention period expires. Versioning (A) is helpful but does not block overwrites. Lifecycle rules (B) automate deletion, not protection. Flow logs (D) are unrelateD)
Bucket Lock with a retention policy is a critical feature for enforcing immutable storage in Google Cloud Storage. When enabled, it ensures that objects within a bucket cannot be deleted or overwritten until the specified retention period has expireD) This immutability applies to all users, including administrators, providing strong protection for compliance-sensitive data, such as financial records, audit logs, or regulated datasets. Versioning, while useful for maintaining previous object states, does not prevent overwrites or deletions, meaning that critical data could still be removed or modified if not carefully manageD) Object Lifecycle management allows administrators to automate actions such as deleting or archiving objects based on age or other conditions, but it does not inherently prevent deletions during the retention perioD) Flow logs provide visibility into network traffic to and from storage buckets but do not enforce data retention or immutability. By implementing Bucket Lock with a retention policy, organizations gain a reliable mechanism to meet regulatory and legal obligations, such as SEC, FINRA, or HIPAA requirements, which often mandate tamper-proof storage of certain records. This ensures that once data is written, it remains intact and accessible for the duration of the retention period, reducing risk of accidental or malicious data loss and supporting strong data governance practices at scale.
Question 148
Which mechanism ensures that BigQuery queries executed by service accounts cannot bypass VPC-SC boundaries?
A) IAM only
B) VPC Service Controls enforced perimeter
C) DNS filtering
D) Cloud NAT
Answer: B
Explanation:
VPC-SC enforces API-level perimeter restrictions, ensuring BigQuery queries originate only from approved networks. IAM cannot restrict based on network perimeter. DNS and NAT are ineffective at stopping API-level exfiltration.
VPC Service Controls provide a robust mechanism to enforce security boundaries around Google Cloud services, ensuring that sensitive data remains protected from unauthorized access or exfiltration. By defining an enforced perimeter, organizations can restrict API-level interactions so that services like BigQuery can only be accessed from approved networks, VPCs, or projects. This prevents data from being inadvertently queried or moved outside trusted environments, even if a user has valid IAM permissions. IAM alone cannot enforce network-based restrictions; while it controls who can access resources, it does not restrict from where the access originates, leaving potential gaps for data exfiltration. DNS filtering might block certain domain names or endpoints but cannot prevent API calls that bypass DNS resolution, and Cloud NAT only manages outbound internet access for private resources, without providing any API-level access control. By implementing VPC Service Controls, organizations establish a zero-trust perimeter around sensitive workloads, combining identity-based permissions with network-level enforcement. This ensures that data remains within compliant boundaries, protects against both accidental and malicious data transfers, and strengthens overall governance and security posture for cloud services handling regulated or critical information.
Question 149
Which method ensures that GKE nodes receive OS updates and security patches automatically?
A) Manual SSH updates
B) Node Auto-Upgrade
C) Cloud NAT
D) VPC routing
Answer: B
Explanation:
Node Auto-Upgrade ensures GKE nodes run patched, secure versions of Kubernetes and OS images. Manual updates risk inconsistency. NAT and routing have no relation to patching. Auto-Upgrade supports cluster security posture.
Node Auto-Upgrade is a key feature in Google Kubernetes Engine that ensures cluster nodes are consistently running the latest patched and secure versions of both the Kubernetes software and the underlying operating system images. By automatically applying security updates and version upgrades, Node Auto-Upgrade helps protect clusters from known vulnerabilities, reducing the risk of compromise or exploitation. Manual SSH updates, while possible, are prone to human error, may result in inconsistent patch levels across nodes, and can be time-consuming for large or dynamic clusters. Cloud NAT is primarily used to provide outbound internet access for private resources and does not play any role in maintaining node security or patch levels. Similarly, VPC routing determines the path network traffic takes between resources but has no impact on the software or security state of nodes. By enabling Node Auto-Upgrade, organizations can maintain a strong cluster security posture without manual intervention, ensuring that nodes are continuously updated with critical patches, security fixes, and minor Kubernetes version upgrades. This automation reduces operational overhead, prevents security drift, and supports best practices for maintaining compliant, resilient, and secure Kubernetes environments in production or multi-tenant cloud deployments.
Question 150
Which solution ensures that only approved IP ranges can access sensitive internal APIs exposed through an Internal Load Balancer?
A) Firewall rules on backend VMs
B) IAM roles
C) NAT forwarding
D) DNS CNAME
Answer: A
Explanation:
Internal LB traffic still reaches backend VMs, so VPC firewall rules applied to instances or subnets enforce precise IP allowlists. IAM controls identity only. NAT and DNS do not manage internal access rules.
The most effective solution to ensure that only approved IP ranges can access sensitive internal APIs exposed through an Internal Load Balancer is to use VPC firewall rules applied to backend virtual machines or subnets. Although the Internal Load Balancer distributes traffic internally within the VPC, all requests ultimately reach the backend instances. By defining precise allowlists with firewall rules, organizations can restrict access to only specific IP ranges, preventing unauthorized internal or external sources from reaching sensitive services. IAM roles, while essential for controlling identity-based access to cloud resources, do not enforce network-level restrictions and therefore cannot block unauthorized IP addresses from connecting to backend services. NAT forwarding manages outbound traffic from private resources but does not influence which sources can access internal endpoints. DNS CNAME records are used for name resolution and cannot enforce access restrictions or control traffic at the network level. Implementing firewall rules at the subnet or instance level provides granular control over traffic, enabling a secure perimeter around sensitive APIs while maintaining the benefits of load balancing. This approach ensures compliance with security policies, mitigates the risk of internal threats, and strengthens the overall security posture of applications deployed behind Internal Load Balancers by preventing exposure to unauthorized network sources.
Question 151
Which technology identifies misconfigurations such as weak firewall rules, open networks, or broad IAM permissions?
A) SCC Security Health Analytics
B) Cloud Monitoring
C) Pub/Sub topics
D) Billing Explorer
Answer: A
Explanation:
Security Health Analytics detects misconfigurations across IAM, networks, buckets, and compute. Monitoring shows performance, Pub/Sub transports messages, Billing Explorer analyzes cost. SHA strengthens posture by automating misconfiguration detection.
Security Command Center’s Security Health Analytics (SHA) is a specialized tool designed to detect misconfigurations and security risks across Google Cloud resources. It continuously evaluates IAM policies, network configurations, Cloud Storage buckets, and compute instances, identifying potential vulnerabilities or deviations from best practices. By automating this detection, SHA helps organizations proactively strengthen their security posture and remediate issues before they can be exploiteD) In contrast, Cloud Monitoring focuses primarily on performance metrics, uptime, and operational health of applications and infrastructure rather than security misconfigurations. Pub/Sub topics are used for message transport and event-driven workflows and do not provide visibility into security risks or misconfigurations. Similarly, Billing Explorer is a financial tool for analyzing cloud costs and usage trends and does not provide any security-specific insights. By using SHA, security teams gain centralized visibility into configuration weaknesses, enabling faster response and prioritization of critical security issues. This automation reduces the reliance on manual audits, helps enforce compliance standards, and ensures that cloud resources adhere to organizational policies and industry best practices. Security Health Analytics is particularly valuable in large-scale or multi-project environments, where manual detection of misconfigurations would be time-consuming and error-prone, providing an essential layer of continuous security assurance.
Question 152
Which method ensures that sensitive workloads running on Compute Engine are isolated at the hardware level against memory-inspection attacks?
A) GMEK
B) Confidential VMs with AMD SEV
C) Manual encryption scripts
D) Cloud Router
Answer: B
Explanation:
Confidential VMs encrypt memory with hardware-level encryption, securing data-in-use. GMEK covers at-rest datA) Scripts cannot protect memory. Routers are irrelevant. Confidential computing is essential for high-security workloads.
Confidential VMs with AMD SEV provide advanced hardware-level encryption for memory, ensuring that data-in-use remains secure while applications are running. This approach protects sensitive information from unauthorized access, even from privileged system administrators or potential hypervisor attacks, making it ideal for workloads that handle confidential or regulated datA) Unlike Google-managed encryption keys (GMEK), which only protect data at rest, Confidential VMs extend encryption to memory, safeguarding data during computation. Manual encryption scripts, while potentially useful for specific data protection tasks, cannot provide consistent, hardware-enforced memory encryption and are prone to errors or misconfigurations. Cloud Router, on the other hand, is a networking service used to manage dynamic routing in virtual private clouds and does not provide any security or encryption capabilities for compute workloads. By leveraging Confidential VMs, organizations can implement confidential computing, ensuring that sensitive workloads remain encrypted throughout their lifecycle, including while in use, not just at rest or in transit. This level of protection supports compliance with stringent security and regulatory standards, mitigates the risk of data exposure during processing, and provides a trusted execution environment for high-security applications such as financial processing, healthcare analytics, or government workloads, significantly strengthening the overall cloud security posture.
Question 153
Which solution prevents external IPs from being assigned to new VM instances?
A) Firewall deny rules
B) Organization Policy: disableExternalIp
C) IAM Recommender
D) SMTP relay
Answer: B
Explanation:
This Org Policy blocks external IP assignment, preventing accidental exposure. Firewalls do not prevent IP allocation. IAM Recommender optimizes roles. SMTP is unrelateD)
The Organization Policy disableExternalIp is a critical control for preventing virtual machine instances from being assigned external IP addresses, effectively reducing the risk of accidental exposure to the public internet. By enforcing this policy at the organizational or project level, administrators can ensure that all newly created VMs are limited to internal IP addresses unless explicitly exempteD) This provides a strong network security boundary and supports zero-trust principles, helping organizations maintain a hardened and compliant cloud environment. While firewall deny rules are important for controlling traffic, they do not prevent a VM from being assigned an external IP in the first place; firewalls only filter traffic after it reaches the instance. IAM Recommender is designed to provide suggestions for optimizing permissions and roles but does not control network exposure or IP assignment. SMTP relay is used for sending email and is unrelated to network security or external IP management. Implementing disableExternalIp ensures that all compute resources remain within trusted internal networks, eliminating accidental internet accessibility that could lead to attacks or data exfiltration. This policy is particularly valuable for sensitive workloads or regulated environments, providing a centralized, enforceable mechanism to maintain consistent security practices across projects and regions.
Question 154
Which feature helps detect unexpected BigQuery access by a user who normally never queries sensitive datasets?
A) NAT logs
B) BigQuery Data Access Logs
C) Cloud Functions logs
D) SQL Insights
Answer: B
Explanation:
Data Access Logs show precise user-level access to datasets and queries executed, aiding anomaly detection. NAT logs cannot identify user-level BigQuery actions. Other tools are unrelateD)
BigQuery Data Access Logs provide detailed visibility into user interactions with datasets, including which users accessed specific tables, the queries they executed, and the time of access. This level of granularity is essential for monitoring, auditing, and detecting anomalous behavior in data analytics environments. By analyzing these logs, security and compliance teams can identify unusual access patterns, such as unexpected queries from specific users or service accounts, helping to prevent data exfiltration or misuse. NAT logs, while useful for monitoring outbound traffic from private resources, do not provide information about individual user actions within BigQuery and therefore cannot support user-level anomaly detection. Cloud Functions logs record execution details for serverless functions but are unrelated to detailed dataset access tracking, and SQL Insights primarily focuses on performance metrics and query optimization rather than security or access monitoring. By leveraging BigQuery Data Access Logs, organizations gain a robust mechanism to track data usage, enforce accountability, and maintain compliance with regulatory requirements such as GDPR, HIPAA, or PCI-DSS. This enables proactive detection of suspicious behavior and ensures that sensitive data remains protected, providing both operational visibility and a foundation for implementing automated security monitoring and alerting within cloud-based data analytics workflows.
Question 155
Which control ensures Cloud SQL instances can only be reached from specific VPC networks?
A) IAM roles
B) Private IP + VPC firewall rules
C) Public IP allowlists
D) NAT gateway
Answer: B
Explanation:
Private IP restricts SQL access to VPC; firewall rules refine allowable sources. IAM controls SQL operations, not network. Public IP allowlists risk exposure. NAT does not secure SQL.
The most effective control to ensure that Cloud SQL instances can only be accessed from specific VPC networks is the combination of Private IP configuration with VPC firewall rules. Configuring Cloud SQL with a Private IP ensures that the instance is only reachable from within the assigned Virtual Private Cloud, effectively removing public internet exposure. This establishes a network-level boundary around the database, restricting access to trusted environments. VPC firewall rules further refine this control by allowing only traffic from authorized subnets, IP ranges, or specific instances, creating a precise allowlist for connections to the database. IAM roles, while essential for controlling who can perform administrative actions such as creating, modifying, or deleting SQL instances, do not enforce network-level restrictions and cannot prevent unauthorized network access. Public IP allowlists do provide some control over which external IP addresses can reach the database, but they inherently expose the instance to the public internet, increasing the attack surface and potential risk. NAT gateways manage outbound traffic from private resources and do not enforce inbound access controls for Cloud SQL instances. By combining Private IP configuration with VPC firewall rules, organizations enforce a strong zero-trust model, reduce exposure, and ensure that only specific, authorized networks can communicate with sensitive SQL instances, significantly strengthening database security.
Question 156
Which solution ensures that Google Cloud resources comply with CIS benchmarks or custom security guardrails?
A) Cloud DNSSEC
B) SCC Security Posture
C) Cloud Logging
D) OS Login
Answer: B
Explanation:
SCC Security Posture evaluates configuration against CIS, PCI, and custom controls. DNSSEC protects DNS integrity. Logging and OS Login do not enforce benchmarks.
Security Command Center’s Security Posture (SCC Security Posture) is a comprehensive solution for ensuring that Google Cloud resources comply with established security benchmarks such as CIS (Center for Internet Security) and custom organizational guardrails. It continuously evaluates configurations across projects, services, and resources, identifying deviations from best practices and providing actionable recommendations to remediate risks. By leveraging SCC Security Posture, organizations can enforce compliance with regulatory standards such as PCI, HIPAA, and GDPR, as well as internal policies, helping to maintain a strong security posture at scale. Cloud DNSSEC, while important for protecting the integrity and authenticity of DNS responses, does not evaluate resource configurations against security benchmarks. Cloud Logging provides visibility into system and application logs but does not actively assess compliance with CIS or custom security policies. Similarly, OS Login manages secure access to virtual machines and IAM integration, but it does not monitor or enforce configuration standards. SCC Security Posture automates the detection of misconfigurations and potential vulnerabilities, providing centralized reporting and visibility across the cloud environment. This enables security teams to proactively address weaknesses, maintain regulatory compliance, and implement consistent security controls, reducing the risk of breaches and ensuring that Google Cloud resources adhere to both industry-standard and custom security requirements.
Question 157
Which technology prevents Cloud Functions from accessing unauthorized Google APIs?
A) IAM Roles + VPC-SC
B) DNS zones
C) NAT routing
D) Cloud Tasks
Answer: A
Explanation:
IAM restricts API permissions; VPC-SC restricts network-level access to APIs. DNS and NAT do not enforce API authorization. Cloud Tasks is unrelateD)
The combination of IAM roles and VPC Service Controls (VPC-SC) provides a robust mechanism to protect Google Cloud APIs by enforcing both identity-based and network-level restrictions. IAM roles define who can access specific APIs or perform particular actions, ensuring that only authorized users or service accounts can interact with resources. This controls access at the identity level but does not prevent requests from being made from untrusted networks. VPC Service Controls complement IAM by establishing a security perimeter around Google Cloud services, restricting API access so that requests are only allowed from authorized VPC networks or projects. Together, these controls create a layered security model that enforces the principle of least privilege while also mitigating risks of data exfiltration or unauthorized API calls from outside trusted networks. DNS zones, while important for resolving domain names, do not control API access or enforce authorization. NAT routing facilitates outbound internet connectivity for private resources but does not restrict or authorize API requests. Cloud Tasks is a managed service for asynchronous task execution and workflow orchestration and does not provide API access control. By combining IAM with VPC Service Controls, organizations can ensure that sensitive APIs are protected against both unauthorized identities and untrusted network sources, providing strong security and compliance for cloud workloads.
Question 158
Which mechanism ensures that cloud administrators cannot modify or decrypt specific customer-owned keys in KMS?
A) IAM owner role
B) Separation of duties via restricted IAM bindings
C) VPC peering
D) Firewall deny rules
Answer: B
Explanation:
Strict IAM roles and separation of duties prevent administrators from accessing encryption keys. Ownership does not override IAM least-privilege. VPC and firewall rules do not control KMS behavior.
The most effective mechanism to ensure that cloud administrators cannot modify or decrypt specific customer-owned keys in Google Cloud Key Management Service (KMS) is implementing separation of duties through carefully restricted IAM bindings. By assigning roles with the principle of least privilege, organizations can segregate responsibilities so that administrators who manage infrastructure or other resources do not have access to cryptographic operations on sensitive keys. This prevents unauthorized decryption or modification of data encrypted with customer-managed keys, ensuring that sensitive information remains protected even from privileged personnel. The IAM owner role, while powerful, grants broad access and does not enforce separation of duties; relying solely on ownership could allow administrators to bypass security policies and access keys. VPC peering establishes private network connectivity between VPCs and does not influence access control for encryption keys, while firewall deny rules regulate network traffic and cannot prevent key access or modification within KMS. By using restricted IAM bindings, organizations can define precise roles, such as granting key usage permissions to applications or service accounts while withholding administrative privileges from personnel. This approach enforces strong access controls, supports compliance with regulatory requirements like HIPAA or PCI-DSS, and protects critical data by ensuring that only authorized entities can perform cryptographic operations on customer-managed keys.
Question 159
Which feature ensures that user-managed encryption keys cannot leave a specific geographic region?
A) Multi-region key rings
B) Regional key rings in Cloud KMS
C) Public IP firewall blocks
D) DNS routing
Answer: B
Explanation:
Regional key rings enforce geographic residency for keys. Multi-region rings replicate keys. Firewalls and DNS unrelateD)
Regional key rings in Cloud Key Management Service (KMS) provide a critical control for ensuring that user-managed encryption keys remain within a specific geographic region. By creating keys within a regional key ring, organizations can enforce geographic residency requirements, ensuring that cryptographic material never leaves the designated region. This is particularly important for meeting data sovereignty and compliance requirements, such as GDPR, HIPAA, or financial regulations, which often mandate that encryption keys and the data they protect remain within a specific jurisdiction. Multi-region key rings, in contrast, are designed to replicate keys across multiple regions for high availability and disaster recovery purposes, which does not guarantee geographic confinement. Public IP firewall rules control network traffic but do not influence the physical location of KMS keys or their replication. DNS routing manages domain name resolution and traffic direction but has no impact on key residency or storage. By using regional key rings, organizations can maintain strict control over where encryption keys are stored and processed, reducing the risk of unauthorized access from outside the permitted geographic areA) This approach ensures that sensitive data encrypted with customer-managed keys adheres to regulatory and corporate policies while providing strong security and governance controls, protecting both the keys and the data they secure throughout its lifecycle.
Question 160
Which security method ensures that Cloud Storage IAM permissions cannot be granted to allUsers or allAuthenticatedUsers?
A) IAM Deny
B) Public Access Prevention
C ACL versioning
D) Logging exclusion
Answer: B
Explanation:
Public Access Prevention blocks public access regardless of IAM or ACL attempts. IAM Deny is limited ACL and logging do not prevent public access.
Public Access Prevention is a key security feature in Google Cloud Storage that ensures buckets and objects cannot be made publicly accessible, regardless of IAM permissions or Access Control List (ACL) configurations. When enabled, it blocks any attempts to grant roles to allUsers or allAuthenticatedUsers, effectively preventing accidental or intentional public exposure of sensitive datA) This provides a strong safeguard for compliance and security, ensuring that only explicitly authorized identities within an organization can access the storage resources. IAM Deny policies can restrict access in some cases, but they are not as comprehensive as Public Access Prevention for controlling public exposure at the bucket or object level. ACL versioning, which manages historical access control lists, does not inherently prevent public access and only tracks or maintains previous ACL configurations. Logging exclusions, such as omitting certain events from audit logs, provide no protection against unauthorized access and are unrelated to controlling IAM permissions. By enforcing Public Access Prevention, organizations can implement a proactive security measure that protects sensitive data from unintended exposure, simplifies access management, and reduces the risk of data breaches. This feature is especially important for regulated or high-value datasets, providing centralized control over access and ensuring that public access cannot be granted inadvertently through misconfigured permissions or ACLs.
