CV0-004 Security Practice Question
A security engineer is reviewing IAM policies and notices a policy that allows all actions on all resources for a user. Which principle of security is being violated?
⚠ Common exam trap
The trap is confusing least privilege with need to know — both limit access, but least privilege is about the minimum permissions to do the job, while need to know is about limiting information access. The wildcard policy is a textbook least-privilege violation.
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
✓
Least privilege
The principle of least privilege states that users should be granted only the minimum permissions necessary to perform their job functions. A policy allowing all actions on all resources grants far more access than needed, directly violating this principle. This is a classic example of an overly permissive IAM policy.
Answer analysis
Option-by-option breakdown
For each option: why learners choose it and why it is or isn't the right answer here.
- ✓
Least privilege
Why this is correct
Least privilege requires granting only the permissions needed for a user's tasks. A policy allowing all actions on all resources grants unrestricted access, directly violating that principle by exceeding any legitimate job function's required scope.
- ✗
Separation of duties
Why it's wrong here
Separation of duties splits a sensitive task across multiple identities so no one person completes it alone; a single user holding all actions violates least privilege instead. It is tempting because both limit individual power, but separation of duties concerns task division among people, not the scope of one policy's permissions.
- ✗
Need to know
Why it's wrong here
Need to know governs whether a subject may access specific information at all, whereas an all-actions policy grants every action on every resource — that is excessive privilege, addressed by least privilege. Need to know is tempting because both concern restricting access, but it targets data relevance rather than the action set granted.
- ✗
Defense in depth
Why it's wrong here
Defence in depth layers independent controls so no single failure exposes the system; an all-actions policy is a single over-permissive grant, not a missing layer. It tempts because least privilege and layered controls are often deployed together, but defence in depth addresses control redundancy, not the breadth of one identity's permissions.
Go deeper
Related to this question
About these practice questions
One of 834 original CV0-004 practice questions on Courseiva, each with a full explanation and wrong-answer analysis — not exam dumps or protected exam content. 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 CV0-004 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 CV0-004 exam.