Q: 10
You have a multicloud environment that contains an Azure subscription, an Amazon Web Services (AWS) subscription, and a Google Cloud Platform (GCP) subscription. You plan to assess data security and compliance. You need to design a Compliance Manager solution that meets the following requirements: • Provides recommended improvement actions that include detailed implementation guidance • Automatically monitors regulatory compliance • Minimizes administrative effort What should you include in the solution?
Options
Discussion
A is the better pick. Defender for Cloud actually covers regulatory monitoring and gives actionable recommendations with guidance for all three clouds, not just Azure. D seems like a trap since connectors alone don't automate compliance checks. I think I'm right, but open to other views.
C or D? I know Sentinel does a lot for monitoring but not really compliance actions, and those connectors seem only partial. But honestly A (Defender for Cloud) ticks the automation and cross-cloud boxes, right? Not totally sure since sometimes D gets mentioned for Compliance Manager setups. If anyone's got hands-on experience, chime in!
Nah, D is just a connector and doesn't handle the automation piece. A works better for multicloud monitoring here.
A . Not positive but Defender for Cloud is what handles continuous compliance checks and automated guidance across multiple clouds.
Its A
A is wrong, it's actually A. Defender for Cloud not only scans Azure but also hooks into AWS and GCP, giving compliance recommendations and monitoring out of the box. The connectors (D) just provide data flow, not automated tracking or real guidance. Pretty confident but open to corrections.
Its A. If you want automatic regulatory monitoring across all three clouds, only Defender for Cloud actually does that.
Pretty sure it's A for this one. Defender for Cloud integrates with AWS and GCP, does automatic compliance assessments, and gives you improvement actions with guidance. D (the connectors) just let you pull stuff in, they don't actually automate the monitoring part. If anyone thinks D works better here, let me know-but I think A fits all the requirements best.
A tbh, D is tempting but it doesn't actually automate compliance checks across clouds. Saw similar on practice tests.
Makes sense to pick A for this since Defender for Cloud actually does continuous posture assessment across those clouds and spits out remediation steps. D just connects data, not as automated. Pretty sure it's A but open to other arguments.
Be respectful. No spam.