CAS-004 Governance, Risk, and Compliance Practice Question
This CAS-004 practice question tests your understanding of governance, risk, and compliance. Read the scenario carefully and evaluate each option against the stated constraints before committing to an answer. 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 manager is selecting key risk indicators (KRIs) for the organization's risk management program. Which THREE of the following are examples of KRIs that can provide early warning of increasing risk?
Answer the question above first, then reveal the full breakdown to understand why each option is right or wrong.
Correct answer & explanation
✓
Number of failed login attempts per hour
KRIs measure risk levels and can indicate changes. Unpatched critical vulnerabilities, number of failed login attempts, and percentage of users with privileged access are direct indicators of risk.
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.
✓
Number of failed login attempts per hour
Why this is correct
Correct: An increase may indicate brute-force attacks, increasing risk.
Related concept
Authentication checks who the user is.
✗
Mean time to detect (MTTD) for incidents
Why it's wrong here
MTTD is a performance metric, not a risk indicator; it measures efficiency.
✓
Percentage of users with privileged access
Why this is correct
Correct: More privileged users increase the risk of insider threats or credential misuse.
Related concept
Authentication checks who the user is.
✓
Number of unpatched critical vulnerabilities
Why this is correct
Correct: An increase indicates higher risk of exploitation.
Related concept
Authentication checks who the user is.
✗
Percentage of systems with current backups
Why it's wrong here
This is a control metric, not a risk indicator; it measures readiness.
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 small business has 20 workstations on the 192.168.1.0/24 network and one public IP from its ISP. The router uses PAT (NAT overload) so all 20 devices share one public address using different source ports. NAT questions test whether you understand the four address terms and which direction each translation applies.
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: Number of failed login attempts per hour — KRIs measure risk levels and can indicate changes. Unpatched critical vulnerabilities, number of failed login attempts, and percentage of users with privileged access are direct indicators of risk.
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.
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.