Microsoft SC-300 Exam With Confidence Using Practice Dumps

In SC-300, the mitigation for unsolicited MFA prompts (push fatigue) is Fraud alert on Azure AD MFA. The materials state that administrators can “allow users to report suspicious MFA prompts and automatically block the user when they select Report fraud in Microsoft Authenticator.” By contrast, Account lockout settings are designed to “temporarily lock an account after a configurable number of consecutive MFA denials to thwart brute-force attempts,” and they do not initiate an automatic block tied to a user’s fraud report. The study guide further clarifies that fraud alerts “can automatically block the user for a specified period (default 90 days) when a fraudulent attempt is reported,” which is precisely the behavior required in the scenario. Therefore, merely configuring Account lockout settings will not meet the goal of automatically blocking users when they report an unsolicited prompt.

In Azure AD Privileged Identity Management (PIM), the SC-300 materials explain that role assignment type determines how a user obtains permissions. An eligible assignment means the user requests activation when needed; an active assignment grants continuous permissions. As the guide states, “Eligible assignments require the user to activate the role for just-in-time access, while active assignments grant standing access.” To allow users of the User administrator role to request the role when needed, you must set assignments to Eligible rather than active.

The same objective also calls for ensuring this capability is available “for up to one year.” In PIM role configuration, the duration of an eligibility is controlled by the Expire eligible assignments after policy. The documentation describes that administrators can “configure the maximum duration for eligible assignments by setting ‘Expire eligible assignments after’ to a specific period (for example, months up to one year).” Therefore, you must modify the “Expire eligible assignments after” setting to the required period.

No requirement mentions activation justification or ticket metadata; those are optional controls used to add context to activations. Consequently, the two actions that directly satisfy the stated technical requirement are: set all assignments to Eligible (C) and configure “Expire eligible assignments after” (D).

In Azure AD, user consent and admin consent workflows control which users or administrators can approve access to organizational data requested by applications.

The question states:

“Users can request admin consent to apps they are unable to consent to: Yes”

“Who can review admin consent requests: Admin2, User2”

When User1 attempts to add an app that requires consent to access company data, and if that app requires admin consent, the request is routed to those designated as admin consent reviewers. In this case, Admin2 and User2 are listed, but only one has the administrative capability to approve the request.

Based on Microsoft documentation:

“Only users who hold an administrative role such as Global Administrator, Cloud Application Administrator, or Authentication Administrator and are designated as reviewers can grant consent on behalf of the organization.”

Here, Admin2 holds the Authentication Administrator role — an Azure AD admin-level role — while User2 has no administrative privileges. Thus, Admin2 is the only eligible user to approve the admin consent request.