Reinforce SC-200 concepts with active-recall study cards covering all 3 blueprint domains. Each card shows the question on the front and the correct answer with a full explanation on the back.
Flashcards work through active recall — the process of retrieving information from memory rather than passively re-reading it. Research consistently shows that active recall produces stronger, longer-lasting memory than re-reading study guides. For SC-200 preparation, this means flashcards are one of the highest-return study tools available.
Attempt recall first
Read the SC-200 question on each card, pause, and attempt to formulate the answer in your own words before revealing. This retrieval attempt — even if wrong — dramatically strengthens memory compared to immediately reading the answer.
Review wrong cards again
When you get a card wrong, note it and add it back to your review pile. Spaced repetition — seeing difficult cards more frequently — is the mechanism that makes flashcard study far more efficient than linear reading.
Study by domain
Group your SC-200 flashcard sessions by domain for the first 3–4 weeks. Master one domain before moving to the next. In the final week, shuffle all cards together to test cross-domain recall — which is what the real SC-200 exam requires.
Short sessions beat marathon reviews
20–30 flashcard cards per session, done daily, produces better retention than a single 200-card marathon session. Five short daily sessions per week over 4 weeks gives you over 400 total card reviews — enough to reliably pass SC-200.
Sample cards from the SC-200 flashcard bank. Read the question, think of the answer, then read the explanation below.
Your organization is implementing Microsoft Sentinel. You need to design a solution to automatically disable a user account in Microsoft Entra ID when a high-severity incident is triggered in Microsoft Sentinel related to that user. Which component should you use?
A playbook that uses the Microsoft Graph API to disable the user.
A playbook is the correct component because it is an automated workflow that can be triggered by a Microsoft Sentinel incident. By using the Microsoft Graph API within the playbook, you can programmatically disable a user account in Microsoft Entra ID, which is the required action for a high-severity incident. This aligns with the need for an automated response that integrates Sentinel with identity management.
Your SOC uses Microsoft Sentinel and Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps. You need to configure a policy that triggers when a user downloads a large number of files from SharePoint Online within a short period. Which policy type should you use?
Activity policy
An activity policy in Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps is designed to monitor and respond to specific user activities, such as downloading a large number of files from SharePoint Online within a short period. This policy type allows you to set thresholds and triggers based on user actions, making it the correct choice for detecting anomalous download behavior.
Your SOC team uses Microsoft Sentinel with multiple workspaces across regions. You need to implement a solution that allows analysts to query all workspaces from a single location without moving data. Which feature should you configure?
Use cross-workspace queries with workspace() expressions in KQL.
Cross-workspace queries using the `workspace()` expression in KQL allow analysts to query multiple Log Analytics workspaces from a single query context without moving or centralizing the data. This is the native Microsoft Sentinel feature designed for multi-workspace environments, enabling seamless querying across regions while keeping data in its original workspace.
Your Microsoft Sentinel environment is not generating incidents from a custom KQL detection rule. The rule runs successfully in the Log Analytics query editor but no incidents appear. What is the most likely cause?
The rule is set to create alerts but not incidents
The most likely cause is that the rule is set to create alerts but not incidents. In Microsoft Sentinel, analytics rules have a toggle to 'Create incidents' from alerts. If this toggle is disabled, alerts are generated but not grouped into incidents. The query running successfully in Log Analytics confirms the rule logic works, but incidents will not appear unless the incident creation toggle is enabled. Entity mapping is not required for incident creation; it enhances correlation but is not a prerequisite.
Refer to the exhibit. You are analyzing a KQL query for a Microsoft Sentinel scheduled rule. The query is intended to detect devices that have both a high number of process executions and network connections to a single IP within an hour. However, the query returns no results even though there are devices meeting the criteria. What is the most likely cause?
The join condition does not include a time window, causing mismatches
The join between DeviceProcessEvents and DeviceNetworkEvents lacks a time window constraint (e.g., 'on $left.Timestamp between ($right.Timestamp - 1h) and ($right.Timestamp + 1h)'). Without this, the join matches events across arbitrary time ranges, causing mismatches where a device's process executions and network connections to a single IP occur at different times, even if both happen within the same hour. This results in no rows being returned when the intended detection requires temporal proximity.
Your SOC is investigating an incident in Microsoft Sentinel. You need to quickly identify all related alerts and entities across the timeline. What Microsoft Sentinel feature should you use?
Open the incident investigation graph.
The incident investigation graph in Microsoft Sentinel provides a visual, interactive map of all alerts, entities (such as users, IP addresses, hosts), and their relationships linked to a specific incident. This allows SOC analysts to quickly see the full scope of an incident across the timeline without manually correlating data, making it the correct tool for this scenario.
Your security team uses Microsoft Defender XDR (formerly Microsoft 365 Defender) to investigate incidents. You notice that some alerts from Microsoft Defender for Endpoint are not being automatically correlated into incidents as expected. You have confirmed that the relevant alert sources are enabled in the Microsoft Defender XDR portal. What is the most likely cause?
Incident correlation rules are not enabled for the relevant alert sources.
Microsoft Defender XDR uses built-in correlation logic to automatically group related alerts from different sources (e.g., Defender for Endpoint, Defender for Office 365) into incidents. If alerts from a specific source, such as Defender for Endpoint, are not being correlated, the most likely cause is that the incident correlation rules for that source are not enabled in the Microsoft Defender XDR portal. Enabling the alert source alone is insufficient; the correlation engine must be explicitly activated for each source to aggregate alerts into incidents.
Which Microsoft Sentinel feature allows you to automatically respond to incidents by running a playbook when an incident is created?
Automation rules
Automation rules in Microsoft Sentinel allow you to define automated responses to incidents, including running a playbook when an incident is created. They provide a centralized way to trigger actions based on incident properties such as severity, status, or specific tactics, without needing to embed automation logic directly in analytics rules.
Your organization uses Microsoft Sentinel. You receive an incident that involves a potential lateral movement detected by Microsoft Defender for Identity. You need to investigate the timeline of the attack. Which Microsoft Sentinel feature should you use?
Investigation graph
The Investigation graph in Microsoft Sentinel is specifically designed to explore the scope and timeline of an attack by visually mapping entities (e.g., users, devices, IPs) and their connections. For a lateral movement incident detected by Defender for Identity, the graph automatically surfaces related alerts, entities, and activities in a chronological view, enabling you to trace the attacker's path across resources. This makes it the correct tool for investigating the attack timeline.
Refer to the exhibit. You are reviewing an alert in Microsoft Defender for Endpoint. The alert details are shown. Which of the following actions should you take first?
Investigate the device and the alert details
The first step in incident response is to investigate the alert details and the affected device to understand the scope and severity of the threat. Without investigation, you cannot determine whether the alert is a true positive, whether isolation is appropriate, or which remediation steps are needed. Microsoft Defender for Endpoint provides a rich investigation experience, including the alert story, device timeline, and related events, which must be reviewed before taking any containment or remediation actions.
You are investigating an incident where a user reported receiving a suspicious email with a malicious attachment. Microsoft Defender for Office 365 did not block it. The email originated from a known malicious sender domain. What configuration should you check first?
Anti-phishing policy in Microsoft Defender for Office 365
The anti-phishing policy in Microsoft Defender for Office 365 is the primary configuration that evaluates sender reputation, impersonation attempts, and spoof intelligence. Since the email originated from a known malicious sender domain and was not blocked, the anti-phishing policy's spoof settings or impersonation protection may be misconfigured or not applied to the affected user. This policy directly controls how Defender handles emails from malicious domains, making it the first place to check.
Your organization uses Microsoft Sentinel. A security analyst reports that an incident was automatically closed by a playbook before the investigation was complete. What should you do to prevent automatic closure in the future?
Modify the analytics rule to not automatically close incidents
The analytics rule that generates the incident includes a setting to automatically close incidents when an alert is triggered again. Modifying this setting prevents the incident from being closed prematurely, regardless of any playbook or automation rule. This ensures that incidents remain open for investigation until manually resolved.
You are a security analyst investigating a detected phishing campaign targeting users in your organization. The Microsoft Defender for Office 365 alert indicates that several users clicked on a malicious link. Which action should you take first to prevent further compromise?
Add the malicious URL to the Microsoft Defender for Endpoint custom threat indicator list.
Adding the malicious URL to the Microsoft Defender for Endpoint custom threat indicator list is the correct first action because it immediately blocks future access to that URL across all endpoints protected by Defender for Endpoint, preventing further compromise from users clicking the same link. This leverages the threat intelligence feed to enforce a block action at the network level, stopping the attack vector proactively without disrupting user productivity or requiring device isolation.
A security team uses Microsoft Sentinel to hunt for signs of credential theft. They want to detect when a user account has been used to log in from an unusual location and then immediately performs a password reset for another user. Which hunting approach is most effective for this scenario?
Write a KQL query that joins SigninLogs with AuditLogs on user principal name and times within a short window
(KQL query using join between two tables) is correct because it allows correlating login events from SigninLogs with password reset events from AuditLogs, combining the two conditions. Option A (playbook) is for automated response, not hunting. Option C (searching only SigninLogs) cannot correlate with password reset events. Option D (watchlist) provides static data, not real-time correlation.
You are threat hunting for credential dumping activity. Which Windows event ID is commonly associated with the use of tools like Mimikatz?
4688 (Process Creation)
Windows Event ID 4688 (Process Creation) logs every new process spawned on the system, including the execution of tools like Mimikatz. When Mimikatz runs, it creates a process (e.g., mimikatz.exe), and the 4688 event captures the command line, parent process, and user context, which are critical for detecting credential dumping activity.
As a threat hunter, you want to proactively search for signs of privilege escalation using the 'AzureHound' tool within your Microsoft Sentinel environment. Which data source is most relevant to ingest to detect AzureHound usage?
Azure Active Directory Audit Logs (now Microsoft Entra ID Audit Logs)
AzureHound queries the Microsoft Graph API to gather Azure AD data, and those API calls are logged in the Azure Active Directory Audit Logs (Microsoft Entra ID Audit Logs). Option A is incorrect because AzureHound does not run on VMs; it is a standalone tool that uses Graph API. Option C is incorrect because AzureHound does not interact with Azure Storage. Option D is incorrect because Azure Network Watcher logs do not capture Azure AD API activity.
The SC-200 flashcard bank covers all 3 official blueprint domains published by Microsoft. Cards are distributed proportionally, so domains with higher exam weight have more cards.
Domain Coverage
Manage a security operations environment
Respond to security incidents
Perform threat hunting
Both flashcards and practice questions are evidence-based study tools. The difference is in what they train:
Flashcards — concept retention
Best for memorising definitions, acronyms, protocol behaviours, command syntax, and conceptual distinctions. Use flashcards to build the foundational vocabulary that SC-200 questions assume you know.
Best in: weeks 1–3
Practice tests — application
Best for applying concepts to realistic scenarios, eliminating distractors, and building exam stamina.SC-200 questions test scenario reasoning — not just recall — so practice tests are essential.
Best in: weeks 3–6
The most effective SC-200 study plan combines both: use flashcards for the first 2–3 weeks to build conceptual foundations, then shift to practice tests and mock exams in the final 2–3 weeks to apply and benchmark that knowledge. Most candidates who pass on their first attempt use both tools.
Yes. Courseiva provides free SC-200 flashcards across all official exam domains. Every card includes the correct answer and a full explanation of why it is right and why the distractors are wrong. The platform also includes topic-based practice, mock exams, and readiness tracking — no account required.
Courseiva has 209+ original SC-200 flashcards across all 3 exam blueprint domains. New cards are added regularly as the question bank grows. All cards are written by certified engineers against the official Microsoft exam objectives.
Courseiva flashcards are purpose-built for IT certification exams. Unlike generic flashcard platforms where content quality varies, every Courseiva card is mapped to the official SC-200 exam blueprint, written by engineers who hold the certification, and includes a full explanation of the correct answer and why the distractors are wrong. This explanation quality is what separates genuine learning from rote memorisation.
Courseiva is a web platform — an internet connection is required. For offline study, we recommend creating free Courseiva account, using the platform in your browser, and using your device's offline capabilities if your browser supports offline web apps.
Save your results, see which domains need more work, and get spaced repetition recommendations — all free.
Sign Up FreeFree forever · Every certification included