CAS-004 Security Architecture Practice Question
A security architect is evaluating a third-party SaaS provider for a critical business function. The provider will process sensitive customer data and must demonstrate compliance with the organization's security requirements. The architect needs to obtain assurance about the provider's security controls without conducting an on-site audit. Which of the following should the architect request?
⚠ Common exam trap
The trap here is accepting a SOC 2 Type I report or self-attestation as equivalent to a Type II report, which covers operating effectiveness over time.
Answer choices
Why each option matters
Answer the question above first, then reveal the full breakdown to understand why each option is right or wrong.
Correct answer & explanation
✓
SOC 2 Type II report
A SOC 2 Type II report provides independent validation of control effectiveness over a period, directly addressing the need for assurance without an on-site audit. It is the standard mechanism for assessing SaaS providers' security and compliance posture.
Answer analysis
Option-by-option breakdown
For each option: why learners choose it and why it is or isn't the right answer here.
- ✗
Self-attestation questionnaire completed by the provider
Why it's wrong here
Self-attestation is not independent and can be biased or incomplete. It does not provide the level of assurance required for a critical business function with sensitive data. An independent audit report is needed to verify controls.
- ✓
SOC 2 Type II report
Why this is correct
A SOC 2 Type II report provides an independent auditor's opinion on the design and operating effectiveness of controls over a period of time, covering security, availability, and confidentiality. It gives assurance without an on-site audit and is specifically designed for service providers handling sensitive data.
- ✗
SOC 2 Type I report
Why it's wrong here
SOC 2 Type I only assesses the suitability of controls at a specific point in time, not their operating effectiveness over a period. It does not provide sufficient assurance for ongoing compliance and is weaker than Type II. The scenario requires assurance over time.
- ✗
Penetration test summary from the provider
Why it's wrong here
A penetration test summary shows vulnerabilities found at a point in time but does not provide a comprehensive assessment of security controls or compliance. It is not a substitute for an independent audit report and does not cover all trust principles. It does not meet the requirement for assurance.
Go deeper
Related to this question
About these practice questions
Courseiva writes every CAS-005 question from scratch — 973 in total, each with an explanation and a wrong-answer breakdown. None are copied from real exams or dumps. Learn why practice questions differ from exam dumps →
JA
Written and reviewed by Johnson Ajibi, MSc IT Security
Senior Network & Security Engineer · founder of Courseiva
Last reviewed September 2026 · checked against the official CompTIA exam blueprint
This CAS-005 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-005 exam.