The immediate revocation of the vendor’s database access is the correct choice because it enforces the principle of least privilege by ensuring that no access persists beyond the defined business need, even before the contract’s formal end date. This action directly reduces risk by eliminating the possibility of unauthorized data exposure or exfiltration during the contract wind-down period, a core tenet of vendor access revocation in zero-trust environments. On the CompTIA SecurityX CAS-004 exam, this scenario tests your ability to apply least privilege to third-party relationships, often appearing in questions about identity and access management (IAM) controls. A common trap is choosing to “monitor” or “extend” access, which still violates the principle by leaving unnecessary permissions active. Memory tip: “Revoke first, re-grant only if needed” — think of it as cutting the key before the lock expires.
CAS-004 Governance, Risk and Compliance Practice Question
This CAS-004 practice question tests your understanding of governance, risk and compliance. The scenario asks you to isolate a root cause — eliminate options that address a different problem before choosing. After answering, compare your reasoning against the explanation and wrong-answer breakdown below. Once you have made your selection, read the full explanation to reinforce the concept and understand why each distractor is designed to mislead on exam day.
A security analyst discovers that a third-party vendor has been granted access to the company's production database for support purposes. The vendor's contract expires in two weeks. What is the BEST course of action to ensure compliance with the principle of least privilege and reduce risk?
Clue words in this question
Noticing these words before you look at the options changes how you read each choice.
Clue: "best"
Why it matters: Signals that multiple options may be partially correct. Choose the option that most directly solves the exact problem described, not the one that sounds most complete.
Clue: "least"
Why it matters: You want the option with minimum overhead, fewest steps, or lowest impact — not the most feature-rich or comprehensive answer.
Answer the question above first, then reveal the full breakdown to understand why each option is right or wrong.
Correct answer & explanation
✓
Immediately revoke the vendor's database access and provide temporary access only if needed.
Revoking access before contract end ensures that the vendor cannot access data after the relationship ends, complying with least privilege. Extending or monitoring only would still leave access beyond necessity, and waiting is risky.
Key principle: Authentication proves identity; authorization controls what that identity can do after login. Both must work for full privileged access.
Answer analysis
Option-by-option breakdown
For each option: why learners choose it and why it is or isn't the right answer here.
✓
Immediately revoke the vendor's database access and provide temporary access only if needed.
Why this is correct
Immediate revocation aligns with least privilege and reduces risk.
Clue confirmation
The clue words "best", "least" in the question point toward this answer.
Related concept
Authentication checks who the user is.
✗
Extend the contract for another year to maintain support continuity.
Why it's wrong here
Extending does not address the immediate need to revoke access.
✗
Wait until the contract expires and then revoke access.
Why it's wrong here
Waiting leaves a period of unnecessary access and potential data exposure.
✗
Monitor the vendor's activities until the contract expires.
Why it's wrong here
Monitoring alone does not revoke access and still leaves a risk window.
Common exam traps
Common exam trap: authentication is not authorization
Logging in proves the user can authenticate. It does not automatically mean the user is allowed to enter privileged or configuration mode. Watch for AAA authorization, privilege level and command authorization details.
Detailed technical explanation
How to think about this question
This kind of question is testing the difference between identity and permission. A user may successfully log in to a router because authentication is working, but still fail to enter configuration mode because authorization is missing, misconfigured or mapped to a lower privilege level.
KKey Concepts to Remember
Authentication checks who the user is.
Authorization controls what the user is allowed to do after login.
Privilege levels affect access to EXEC and configuration commands.
AAA, TACACS+ and RADIUS can separate login success from command access.
TExam Day Tips
→Do not assume successful login means full administrative access.
→Look for words such as cannot enter configuration mode, privilege level, authorization or command access.
→Separate login problems from permission problems before choosing the answer.
Key takeaway
Authentication proves identity; authorization controls what that identity can do after login. Both must work for full privileged access.
Real-world example
How this comes up in practice
A junior network technician can log in to a core router but cannot reach the enable prompt or configuration mode. The AAA server is authenticating the login — but the authorisation policy only grants privilege level 1, not 15. Authentication (who you are) is working; authorisation (what you can do) is not.
What to study next
Got this wrong? Here's your next step.
Review Cisco AAA concepts — authentication, authorization, and accounting. Study privilege levels (0–15), command authorization under TACACS+, and how RADIUS differs. Then practise related CAS-004 questions on access control and AAA configuration.
Governance, Risk and Compliance — This question tests Governance, Risk and Compliance — Authentication checks who the user is..
What is the correct answer to this question?
The correct answer is: Immediately revoke the vendor's database access and provide temporary access only if needed. — Revoking access before contract end ensures that the vendor cannot access data after the relationship ends, complying with least privilege. Extending or monitoring only would still leave access beyond necessity, and waiting is risky.
What should I do if I get this CAS-004 question wrong?
Review Cisco AAA concepts — authentication, authorization, and accounting. Study privilege levels (0–15), command authorization under TACACS+, and how RADIUS differs. Then practise related CAS-004 questions on access control and AAA configuration.
Are there clue words in this question I should notice?
Yes — watch for: "best", "least". Signals that multiple options may be partially correct. Choose the option that most directly solves the exact problem described, not the one that sounds most complete.
What is the key concept behind this question?
Authentication checks who the user is.
About these practice questions
Courseiva creates original exam-style practice questions with explanations and wrong-answer analysis. It does not publish real exam questions, exam dumps, or protected exam content. Learn why practice questions differ from exam dumps →
Share a tip, memory trick, or ask about the reasoning behind this question. Do not post real exam questions, leaked content, braindumps, or copyrighted exam material. Comments are moderated and may be removed without notice.
This CAS-004 practice question is part of Courseiva's free CompTIA certification practice question bank. Courseiva provides original exam-style practice questions with explanations, topic-based practice, mock exams, readiness tracking, and study analytics to help learners prepare for the CAS-004 exam.
Question Discussion
Share a tip, memory trick, or ask about the reasoning behind this question. Do not post real exam questions, leaked content, braindumps, or copyrighted exam material. Comments are moderated and may be removed without notice.
Sign in to join the discussion.