Courseiva
General Security ConceptsmediumMultiple ChoiceObjective-mapped

SY0-701 General Security Concepts Practice Question

A security analyst at a hospital is reviewing user permissions in the electronic health record (EHR) system. The analyst discovers that all nursing staff accounts are members of the 'Administrators' group, which grants full read and write access to all patient records, as well as the ability to modify system configuration settings. The nursing staff's job responsibilities only require viewing and updating records for patients currently assigned to them. Which security principle is most directly violated by this configuration?

⚠ Common exam trap

It's easy for candidates to confuse 'least privilege' with 'defense in depth' because both are security principles, but defense in depth is about multiple layers of protection, not about limiting user permissions to the minimum necessary.

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 dictates that users should be granted only the minimum permissions necessary to perform their job functions. In this case, nursing staff only need read and write access to records of currently assigned patients, but membership in the 'Administrators' group grants full read/write access to all patient records and the ability to modify system configuration settings, which far exceeds their job requirements. This directly violates least privilege by providing excessive, unnecessary privileges that increase the risk of unauthorized access or accidental misconfiguration.

Answer analysis

Option-by-option breakdown

For each option: why learners choose it and why it is or isn't the right answer here.

  • Defense in depth

    Why it's wrong here

    Defense in depth is a risk management strategy that relies on redundant, overlapping security controls—such as network segmentation, endpoint detection, and layered firewalls—to ensure that if one control fails, others still protect the asset. In this scenario, the hospital's problem is not a deficiency in layered defenses but an authorization misconfiguration that grants nursing staff full administrative rights. Layered defenses could exist and still leave this over-privileged state unaddressed, so the direct violation is that permissions exceed the minimum required, which is the essence of least privilege, not defense in depth.

    When this WOULD be correct

    Defense in depth would be correct if the question described a scenario where multiple security controls (e.g., firewall, antivirus, access controls) are missing or bypassed, leading to a breach, and asks which principle is lacking.

  • Least privilege

    Why this is correct

    The principle of least privilege dictates that users should have only the minimum permissions needed to perform their duties. Granting nursing staff full administrative rights violates this principle because the staff only need limited, role-specific access to patient records.

  • Non-repudiation

    Why it's wrong here

    Non-repudiation ensures that an action or transaction cannot be denied by the party who performed it, typically through cryptographic mechanisms like digital signatures and append-only audit logs that provide proof of origin and integrity. The scenario involves a privilege review of nursing staff, not a dispute over whether a specific action occurred, so non-repudiation measures are irrelevant to the identified flaw. Over-granting administrative rights may raise accountability concerns, but the immediate access-control violation is that users possess permissions beyond their job duties, which is a least-privilege issue, not a non-repudiation failure.

    When this WOULD be correct

    A question where a user denies having performed a specific action (e.g., modifying a patient record), and the system lacks audit logs or digital signatures to prove otherwise, would make non-repudiation the correct answer.

  • Availability

    Why it's wrong here

    Availability ensures that systems and data are accessible when needed by authorized users. While excessive privileges might indirectly affect availability if misused, the direct violation in this case is that users have more permissions than necessary, which is a breach of least privilege.

    When this WOULD be correct

    A scenario where a hospital's EHR system experiences frequent downtime due to a single point of failure, or where a denial-of-service attack prevents nurses from accessing patient records, would make availability the most directly violated principle.

Option-by-option analysis

Why each answer is right or wrong

Understanding why wrong answers are wrong — and when they would be correct — is what separates a 750 score from a 900. The SY0-701 exam frequently reuses these exact scenarios with slightly different constraints.

Least privilegeCorrect answer

Why this is correct

The principle of least privilege dictates that users should have only the minimum permissions needed to perform their duties. Granting nursing staff full administrative rights violates this principle because the staff only need limited, role-specific access to patient records.

Defense in depthWrong answer — click to see why

Why this is wrong here

Defense in depth is a layered security strategy, not a principle violated by excessive permissions. The issue here is granting more access than needed, which directly violates least privilege.

★ When this WOULD be the correct answer

Defense in depth would be correct if the question described a scenario where multiple security controls (e.g., firewall, antivirus, access controls) are missing or bypassed, leading to a breach, and asks which principle is lacking.

Why candidates choose this

Candidates may confuse 'defense in depth' with general security best practices, thinking that having too many permissions weakens security layers, but the specific violation is about excessive privileges.

Non-repudiationWrong answer — click to see why

Why this is wrong here

Non-repudiation ensures that actions cannot be denied by the user, typically through audit logs or digital signatures. The scenario describes excessive permissions, not a lack of accountability for actions.

★ When this WOULD be the correct answer

A question where a user denies having performed a specific action (e.g., modifying a patient record), and the system lacks audit logs or digital signatures to prove otherwise, would make non-repudiation the correct answer.

Why candidates choose this

Candidates may confuse non-repudiation with authorization or access control, or think that excessive permissions could lead to repudiation issues, but the core violation here is about granting more access than needed.

AvailabilityWrong answer — click to see why

Why this is wrong here

The question describes excessive permissions (full access to all records and system config) for nursing staff, which violates least privilege, not availability. Availability concerns uptime and access to systems when needed, which is not directly impacted by this misconfiguration.

★ When this WOULD be the correct answer

A scenario where a hospital's EHR system experiences frequent downtime due to a single point of failure, or where a denial-of-service attack prevents nurses from accessing patient records, would make availability the most directly violated principle.

Why candidates choose this

Candidates may confuse 'availability' with 'access' — thinking that granting broad access ensures availability, or they may misinterpret the scenario as a risk to system availability due to potential misconfiguration.

Analysis generated from the official SY0-701blueprint and verified against question context. The “when correct” sections are what AI assistants cite when candidates ask “what’s the difference between these options?”

About these practice questions

One of 1,013 original SY0-701 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 →

How Courseiva writes practice questions · Editorial policy

Same concept, more angles

1 more way this is tested on SY0-701

These questions test the same concept from different angles. Work through them to make sure you can recognise it however the exam phrases it.

Variation 1. A help desk analyst can reset passwords in the ticketing portal but cannot view payroll records, edit user profiles, or access other HR functions. Which security principle is the organization applying?

medium
  • A.Least privilege
  • B.Defense in depth
  • C.Separation of duties
  • D.Zero trust

Why A: The help desk analyst is granted only the permissions necessary to perform their job function—resetting passwords—while all other HR functions are explicitly denied. This is the core definition of least privilege: each user or system component receives the minimum set of access rights needed to complete their tasks. By restricting the analyst’s account to password reset operations only, the organization reduces the attack surface and limits potential damage from compromised credentials or insider misuse.

JA

Written by Johnson Ajibi, MSc IT Security

Senior Network & Security Engineer · founder of Courseiva

This SY0-701 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 SY0-701 exam.