IIBA CCBA Exam Prep
Certification of Competency in Business Analysis (Page 24 )

• To mitigate resistance, the BA should directly engage the stakeholders who are pushing back (the technical team) to uncover their concerns, constraints, and reasons for resisting the end-of-project handover.
• This enables collaborative problem-solving and may lead to adjustments (e.g., intermediate deliverables, phased rollouts, or alignment of acceptance criteria) that satisfy both business and technical needs.
• Escalating to the sponsor or emailing the business team may not address the root causes of resistance. Reassessing objectives could be useful later, but the immediate best practice is to have a targeted discussion with the technical team to understand and resolve concerns.

• Job shadowing is an elicitation technique that is part of the broader job observation approach. The observer watches workers perform tasks (either passively or actively) to understand the workflow, especially when the worker cannot articulate the process themselves.
• The other options are not elicitation techniques tied to job observation: A) Identifying stakeholders is an initial BA activity; C) Defining and determining business analysis processes is part of planning; D) Planning how requirements will be approached, traced, and prioritized is elicitation planning (a precursor to elicitation), not the observation-based elicitation.

• There are two solutions: A is worth $456,000 to the organization, B is worth $565,000.
• Management chooses A due to lower cost, less risk, and faster completion.
• The opportunity cost is the value of the best alternative that was not chosen. Since B has the higher value ($565,000) and wasn’t chosen, the foregone value is $565,000.
• Note: The \(|565k - 456k| = 109k\) is the difference in value, not the opportunity cost.

1. You try to access a cloud application, such as accounting software.
2. The application redirects you to the company’s IdP.
3. You authenticate with the IdP.
4. The IdP sends a digitally signed SAML assertion to the application.
5. The application validates the assertion and grants access.

• The user’s identity
• Whether authentication succeeded
• Roles or group membership
• Access-related attributes

• Reviewing security objectives to ensure they support business goals.
• Ensuring security requirements are integrated consistently across business units.
• Coordinating security policies, risk management, controls, and awareness activities.

• Executive management: Provides direction, funding, and support, but usually does not manage day-to-day security integration.
• Board of directors: Provides governance and oversight, not operational security coordination.
• Steering committee: Helps coordinate and prioritize initiatives, but the CISO typically owns the overall security program and ensures its integration.

Question 3: AWS Storage Gateway File Gateway

• A: S3 bucket per user — S3 is object storage, not a traditional shared file system; mounting it requires extra tools and is less efficient.
• B: File Gateway — Provides a local file share using standard file protocols while storing files in Amazon S3. This preserves convenient local access and extends storage capacity.
• C: WorkSpaces and WorkDocs — Designed for virtual desktops and document collaboration, not large shared file storage.
• D: EC2 with EBS — EBS is attached to one EC2 instance and is not designed for direct multi-user file sharing.

• Espionage: Stealing information for intelligence or competitive purposes.
• Data exfiltration: Unauthorized removal or transfer of data.
• Nation-state attack: An attack sponsored or conducted by a government.
• Shadow IT: Unapproved technology or methods used to access organizational resources.

• Red team: Simulates attackers; exploits weaknesses to test security.
• Blue team: Defends systems; monitors, detects, and responds to attacks.
• Purple team: Combines red- and blue-team efforts to improve detection and defense.
• White team: Oversees or manages the test, defining rules, scope, and authorization.

• A — Securing information assets: This is the responsibility of management and operational/security teams.
• B — Validating protection: Correct. The auditor checks whether controls—such as access restrictions, encryption, retention, and handling procedures—match the asset’s classification.
• C — Ensuring alignment with regulations: Management and legal/compliance functions typically establish classification requirements; the auditor may assess compliance but does not primarily define alignment.
• D — Defining classification levels: This is a management responsibility based on business needs, risk, and regulatory obligations.

• A. IDS attack signatures: An IDS primarily detects suspicious network activity; it is not the best tool for scanning uploaded files.
• C. Load balancer: Improves availability and distributes traffic but does not inspect files for malware.
• D. WAF: Protects web applications against attacks such as SQL injection and command injection. It may inspect HTTP requests, but malware scanning of uploaded PDFs is the key requirement here.

• Plenum: Describes a fire-resistant cable jacket rating, not a transmission medium or speed.
• Ethernet: Describes a networking technology; Ethernet can use copper or fiber, so the term alone does not identify the fastest cable type.
• DAC (Direct Attach Copper): Uses copper and is typically intended for short-distance, high-speed connections in data centers.

• Determining ISP-assigned address space: Usually involves public reconnaissance, such as WHOIS or regional Internet registry information.
• Bypassing DNS sinkholing: Would require evidence that malicious domains are resolving outside the organization’s sinkhole controls.
• Achieving initial access: DNS log entries alone do not demonstrate compromise or entry.
• Exfiltrating data: DNS tunneling generally involves repeated queries containing encoded or unusually long data, not merely internal host discovery.

• B — Single customer login across properties: Customer 360 Identity provides centralized identity services, allowing an organization to recognize a customer across multiple digital properties and applications. This helps UC understand authenticated activity as part of a broader customer identity.

• C — Multi-brand support: Customer 360 Identity can support multiple brands and user experiences. Identity services can remain centralized while correlating a customer’s activity across different corporate brands or channels.

• A: Customer 360 Identity does not automatically populate all data into Customer 360 Data Manager and Customer 360 Audiences. Integration and data configuration are still required.
• D: Tracking anonymous activity and linking it after sign-up may be possible through broader customer-data and tracking implementations, but it is not the primary Customer 360 Identity benefit tested here. Identity focuses mainly on authentication, registration, and cross-property identity correlation.

• MAC flooding: Overwhelms a switch’s MAC address table, potentially causing traffic to be broadcast.
• DNS spoofing: Provides false DNS responses to redirect users.
• ARP poisoning: Sends false ARP information to associate an attacker’s MAC address with another device’s IP address.

• Configure row-level security (RLS) using the sales region and the HR manager’s identity.
• Publish the reports and datasets through a Power BI app.
• Grant the HR managers permission to use the app, but do not add them as workspace members.
• App users can view and interact with reports while RLS limits them to their region.
• They cannot modify the report layout because they do not have workspace editing permissions.

• Adding them to the workspace gives them workspace permissions that may allow report or dataset changes, depending on the assigned role.
• Creating copies is unnecessary and creates maintenance and security problems.
• Hosting datasets and reports in different workspaces does not, by itself, provide the required controlled access.

• Confirm the required columns and data types
• Identify the target/label column
• Handle missing or duplicate records if present
• Transform data into a suitable format
• Split it into training and validation/test datasets

1. Prepare the training data
2. Select an algorithm or configure AutoML
3. Train the model
4. Evaluate its performance
5. Tune hyperparameters if needed
6. Deploy the model

• If the hashes match, the software has likely not changed.
• If they differ, the software was modified or corrupted.

• Encryption: Protects confidentiality by making data unreadable; it does not primarily verify that software was unchanged.
• Baselines: Establish expected configurations or states, but hashing is the specific method for checking file integrity.
• Tokenization: Replaces sensitive data with non-sensitive tokens and is unrelated to software integrity.

1. Create a custom Sensitive Information Type (SIT) in the Microsoft Purview portal.
2. Use a regular expression to match the 32-character alphanumeric account number.
3. Reference that SIT in the DLP policy protecting SharePoint Online.

• Format-based data ? custom SIT with RegEx
• Built-in sensitive data ? Microsoft-provided SIT
• Document classification/protection ? sensitivity labels
• Security investigation queries ? Advanced Hunting, not DLP detection

Statement 1 — Correct

Statement 2 — Correct

• Server provisioning
• Operating systems and runtime infrastructure
• Scaling
• Much of the maintenance and patching

• Thin clients reduce endpoint hardware requirements but do not specifically streamline code deployment.
• Private cloud provides dedicated cloud infrastructure but usually requires more management and expense.
• Virtual machines improve resource utilization, but administrators still manage the VMs, operating systems, and deployments.

• Reduce the training data: Usually makes overfitting worse.
• Add hyperparameters: Hyperparameters already control training; simply adding them does not solve the problem. Proper tuning could help, but that is not what the option states.
• Increase training time: More training can worsen overfitting if the model is already memorizing the training data.

• Password spraying: Tries a few common passwords against many accounts; no indication of repeated login attempts.
• Remote-access Trojan (RAT): Could install malware, but it does not explain how the attacker obtained the administrator’s credentials.
• Dictionary attack: Tries words or common passwords against an account; again, the scenario specifically highlights Telnet’s lack of encryption.

• Limiting the number of MAC addresses allowed on a switch port
• Restricting ports to specific known MAC addresses
• Taking an action—such as dropping frames or shutting down the port—when the limit is exceeded

• Load balancer: Distributes application traffic; it does not protect switch MAC tables.
• IPS: May detect some attack traffic, but is not the primary control for switch-port MAC limits.
• NGFW: Filters network traffic at the firewall, but does not directly control MAC addresses learned by a switch.

• Business
• People
• Governance
• Platform
• Security
• Operations

• Cloud financial management
• Portfolio management
• Data governance
• Risk management
• Compliance

• The servers run different operating systems: Windows, Linux, and Unix.
• Containers generally share the host operating system’s kernel, so they cannot normally run workloads requiring unrelated kernels, such as Windows and Linux, on the same Linux host.
• A hypervisor can create separate virtual machines, allowing each VM to run its own guest OS.
• A Type 2 hypervisor runs on top of a host operating system and can support multiple guest operating systems.

• The type of change: standard, normal, or emergency
• The risk, impact, and complexity
• The change model being used

• A standard change may be pre-authorized through its change model.
• A normal change may require assessment and approval by an appropriate change authority.
• An emergency change may be authorized by an emergency change authority, often using an expedited process.

• Change authorities are not only needed for emergency changes.
• They are not assigned only when a change is deployed.
• They are not only required for normal changes.

• Approve major information security policies
• Allocate funding and resources
• Set the organization’s risk appetite
• Ensure security supports business objectives

• Evaluating vendors is generally handled by security, procurement, or technical teams.
• Assessing risks is typically performed by security and risk-management professionals, with management accepting or prioritizing the risks.
• Monitoring regulatory adherence is usually handled by compliance, audit, or security functions.

• Prevention costs: Avoiding defects, such as staff training and improved product design. The company has invested in these.
• Appraisal costs: Detecting defects before products reach customers, such as inspection and testing. The planned batch sampling has not been implemented.
• Internal failure costs: Correcting defects found before delivery.
• External failure costs: Dealing with defects after delivery, such as refunds, replacements, complaints and lost sales.

• Microservices: An application-design approach that divides an application into smaller services. It does not inherently reduce the number of operating systems.
• Virtualization: Creates virtual machines, but each VM generally requires its own complete operating system. This improves isolation but does not minimize OS instances as effectively.
• Infrastructure as code: Uses code to automate infrastructure deployment and configuration. It improves consistency but does not determine how many operating systems are used.

• Internal hostnames and subdomains
• Network structure and naming conventions
• Servers and services
• Relationships between systems

• Determining ISP-assigned address space: Usually involves external registration and DNS information, not internal host discovery.
• Bypassing DNS sinkholing: Would require evidence that malicious DNS requests avoided redirection.
• Initial access: DNS queries alone do not show that the attacker gained access.
• Exfiltrating data: DNS tunneling can do this, but the snippet would typically show encoded or unusually long DNS queries.

• Additional running costs: $800
• Less depreciation: $300

• The $100 reduction in fixed production overhead absorbed is only an accounting reallocation. It does not represent an actual saving in total fixed overhead.

• Honeypots: Deliberately vulnerable or attractive systems designed to lure attackers. Legitimate users should not access them, so activity on a honeypot is a strong indicator of compromise.
• DNS sinkholes: Redirect requests for known malicious domains to a controlled internal system instead of allowing the connection. This can identify infected hosts attempting to contact command-and-control infrastructure.

• Tokenization: Replaces sensitive data with non-sensitive tokens; it protects data but does not primarily detect attackers.
• CI/CD: Automates software development and deployment processes.
• Threat modeling: Identifies potential threats and weaknesses before or during system design.
• Data obfuscation: Makes data harder to understand, but it is not an attacker-detection method.

• Third-party enterprise application with embedded AI: The provider manages most security controls. The customer mainly manages users, data, and configuration.
• Application using an existing third-party FM: The customer controls the application and its inputs/outputs, but the provider controls the underlying model and infrastructure.
• Fine-tuning a third-party FM: The customer has additional responsibility for training data, data protection, and model behavior, but still depends on the provider’s base model and platform.
• Building and training a model from scratch: The customer controls the model, training data, application, deployment, and many security safeguards. This creates the greatest security ownership.

• Updating the CRL: Revokes compromised certificates, but does not fix the CA flaw that allowed them to be created.
• Changing passwords: May be necessary if accounts were compromised, but it does not address the certificate-generation vulnerability.
• Implementing SOAR: Improves security automation and response; it does not remediate the underlying PKI weakness.

• contoso.onmicrosoft.com
• contoso1.onmicrosoft.com

• onmicrosoft.com domains: Maximum of five per tenant.
• Custom domains: Domains that your organization owns and verifies in Microsoft 365.

• Subject: The entity that initiates an action—here, Derrick/user account.
• Object: The resource being accessed— the file.
• Action: Reading the file.

• A — Correct: Flow Builder is declarative and visual, so administrators and other non-developers can participate in designing and improving business processes without writing Apex.
• D — Correct: Flow Builder provides visual debugging tools, allowing an admin to test paths, inspect variable values, and identify where a specific business case fails.
• E — Correct: A flow’s visual structure documents the logic and makes later maintenance easier than reading and updating custom Apex code.

• B — Incorrect: Flow debugging does not attach a debugger to live customer sessions. The admin uses Flow Builder’s debug functionality with test inputs; this is not live-session debugging and should not be used to monitor real customer transactions.

yaml 
clusterIP: None

• CronJob: Runs Jobs on a schedule and normally does not need stable networking.
• Deployment: Manages interchangeable, stateless replicas and usually uses a regular Service.
• DaemonSet: Runs a Pod on selected nodes but does not inherently require stable Pod identities.

• 16GB RAM: A 64-bit OS is needed to use more than roughly 4GB effectively, but RAM capacity does not prove the CPU supports 64-bit operation.
• 500GB HDD: Storage capacity has no bearing on OS architecture.
• 1Gbps Ethernet: Network speed is unrelated to CPU architecture.

• Response and resolution time frames
• Availability or uptime requirements
• Performance targets
• Support obligations
• Penalties for failing to meet requirements

• SOW (Statement of Work): Defines the project’s scope, tasks, and deliverables.
• MOA (Memorandum of Agreement): Describes cooperation and responsibilities between parties.
• MOU (Memorandum of Understanding): Records a general mutual understanding, usually without detailed enforceable service targets.

• A: Describes a broad purpose and direction, but is not the specific CIMA definition.
• C: “Scoping out” activities is too vague and incomplete.
• D: Combines long-term goals, strategies and policies, but describes a wider strategic-planning statement rather than the definition of strategy itself.

• D — Managers focus on keeping costs low in the short term to maximise profits.

• E — Managers are given incentives to meet or undercut budgets.

• F — Managers delegate responsibility simply to reduce their workload.

• Unfamiliar locations or IP addresses
• Anonymous or malicious IP addresses
• Leaked credentials
• Unusual sign-in behavior

• Due diligence: Investigating and evaluating a third party before entering into or continuing a business relationship.
• Attestation: An independent party provides assurance about an organization’s claims or controls. A SOC 2 examination is an example of an attestation engagement, but the analyst requesting and reviewing the report is performing due diligence.
• Internal audit: Reviews the organization’s own internal controls.
• Penetration testing: Actively tests systems for exploitable vulnerabilities.

• Database data: Aggregates are used to retrieve structured data, commonly from entities and database sources.
• Screen scope: A Screen Aggregate belongs to the screen where it is defined and is not directly reusable as a screen-level aggregate elsewhere.
• Asynchronous and parallel execution: Multiple Screen Aggregates can run asynchronously and in parallel, helping the screen load data efficiently.

• A: Using an external OAuth 2.0 identity provider could provide unified identity, but it does not specifically address Salesforce capacity or high-volume login limits.
• B: Making the Experience Cloud community a SAML identity provider and using JIT provisioning is a possible federation pattern, but it may not be appropriate for this scale without Salesforce validation.
• C: A default account is unrelated to solving identity unification and high login throughput. Person Accounts can be supported in appropriate B2C Commerce integrations.

• The requirement is an assessment of the Azure environment’s design, which requires a support plan offering proactive architectural guidance.
• Premier support would provide this capability, but it is a high-cost option.
• Since the requirement says to minimize expenses, Premier is not the best recommendation.
• A lower-cost plan with the required advisory/design-review capability—historically Professional Direct in Azure’s support-plan model—would be more appropriate.