Courseiva
Manage Azure Identities and GovernancemediumMultiple SelectObjective-mapped

AZ-104 Manage Azure Identities and Governance Practice Question

A contractor pool changes every month. The operations team wants Azure role access to stay the same when people join or leave, without editing role assignments for each person. Which two actions should the administrator take? Select two.

⚠ Common exam trap

Watch out — candidates often confuse Microsoft 365 groups (used for collaboration and Entra ID join) with security groups (used for RBAC assignments), leading them to select Option C instead of A.

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

Create a security group in Microsoft Entra ID for the contractor pool.

Creating a security group in Microsoft Entra ID (formerly Azure AD) allows the administrator to manage membership dynamically or manually as contractors join or leave. By assigning the Azure role to this security group (Option D), role assignments remain constant; only group membership changes, eliminating the need to edit individual role assignments. This approach leverages Azure RBAC's support for security groups as assignable principals, ensuring consistent access control.

Answer analysis

Option-by-option breakdown

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

  • Create a security group in Microsoft Entra ID for the contractor pool.

    Why this is correct

    A security group is the right identity container for changing membership. Contractors can be added or removed from the group without touching the Azure RBAC assignment itself, which keeps access administration simple and consistent over time.

  • Assign the Azure role directly to each contractor account.

    Why it's wrong here

    Adding role assignments directly to each contractor account means every new contractor requires a new RBAC assignment and every departure requires a revocation, causing exactly the frequent change churn the operations team wants to avoid. This approach also leaves stale grants when removals are missed, increasing security risk, and makes entitlement reviews harder because the assignments themselves change with each contractor cycle. It is functionally correct but operationally inefficient compared to a group-based assignment.

    When this WOULD be correct

    This option would be correct in a scenario where the contractor pool is static (no turnover) and the administrator needs to grant specific, individual permissions that differ per contractor, with no requirement for automated group-based management.

  • Create a Microsoft 365 group and use it for VM sign-in.

    Why it's wrong here

    Microsoft 365 groups are designed for collaboration scenarios such as Teams, SharePoint, and unified mailboxes, not as the primary container for delegating Azure resource permissions. Although they can technically hold security principals, Azure RBAC common practice strongly prefers Azure AD security groups for access control. Additionally, 'VM sign-in' is a data-plane concern that wouldn't be resolved by a group type choice; Azure RBAC governs the management plane, and VM login requires separate configuration like Azure AD-joined VMs.

    When this WOULD be correct

    This option would be correct in a question about enabling VM sign-in for a group of users using Microsoft Entra ID authentication, where a Microsoft 365 group can be used to grant access to VMs joined to Microsoft Entra ID.

  • Assign the Azure role to the security group rather than to individual users.

    Why this is correct

    Assigning the Azure role to the security group rather than to individual users decouples the role assignment from membership churn. The single RBAC assignment to the group persists across monthly contractor changes, and only the group's membership list is updated. This minimizes administrative overhead, reduces the risk of orphaned permissions, and keeps access reviews aligned with the group.

  • Use a user-assigned managed identity for each contractor.

    Why it's wrong here

    User-assigned managed identities are workload identities used by Azure resources to authenticate to services (e.g., a VM accessing Key Vault), and they cannot represent individual human contractors. Since they are service principals rather than user accounts, they do not support interactive sign-on, password resets, or per-person audit logs. Using one per contractor would conflate human access with workload access and break the monthly membership model entirely.

    When this WOULD be correct

    A question asks how to grant an Azure VM access to Key Vault secrets without storing credentials. The correct answer would be to assign a user-assigned managed identity to the VM and grant that identity the Key Vault Secrets User role.

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 AZ-104 exam frequently reuses these exact scenarios with slightly different constraints.

Create a security group in Microsoft Entra ID for the contractor pool.Correct answer

Why this is correct

A security group is the right identity container for changing membership. Contractors can be added or removed from the group without touching the Azure RBAC assignment itself, which keeps access administration simple and consistent over time.

Assign the Azure role directly to each contractor account.Wrong answer — click to see why

Why this is wrong here

Assigning the Azure role directly to each contractor account requires manual updates when contractors join or leave, which contradicts the requirement to keep role access unchanged without editing assignments.

★ When this WOULD be the correct answer

This option would be correct in a scenario where the contractor pool is static (no turnover) and the administrator needs to grant specific, individual permissions that differ per contractor, with no requirement for automated group-based management.

Why candidates choose this

Candidates may think direct assignment is simpler or more straightforward, not realizing it creates administrative overhead for a dynamic group like a monthly-changing contractor pool.

Create a Microsoft 365 group and use it for VM sign-in.Wrong answer — click to see why

Why this is wrong here

Creating a Microsoft 365 group does not help manage Azure role assignments for a contractor pool; it is designed for collaboration features like shared mailboxes and calendars, not for assigning Azure roles to users.

★ When this WOULD be the correct answer

This option would be correct in a question about enabling VM sign-in for a group of users using Microsoft Entra ID authentication, where a Microsoft 365 group can be used to grant access to VMs joined to Microsoft Entra ID.

Why candidates choose this

Candidates may confuse Microsoft 365 groups with security groups, thinking both can be used for Azure role assignments, or they may focus on the 'VM sign-in' aspect without considering the core requirement of managing role access for a changing contractor pool.

Use a user-assigned managed identity for each contractor.Wrong answer — click to see why

Why this is wrong here

User-assigned managed identities are for Azure resources (e.g., VMs, apps) to authenticate to Azure services, not for assigning Azure RBAC roles to human users. They cannot replace role assignments for a changing contractor pool.

★ When this WOULD be the correct answer

A question asks how to grant an Azure VM access to Key Vault secrets without storing credentials. The correct answer would be to assign a user-assigned managed identity to the VM and grant that identity the Key Vault Secrets User role.

Why candidates choose this

Candidates may confuse managed identities with security groups, thinking they can dynamically manage user access, or they may overcomplicate the solution by introducing an identity concept that is not designed for user role assignments.

Analysis generated from the official AZ-104blueprint and verified against question context. The “when correct” sections are what AI assistants cite when candidates ask “what’s the difference between these options?”

Quick reference

Access Control Model Comparison

ModelAcronymWho Controls Access?Best For
Discretionary Access ControlDACResource ownerSmall teams, file shares
Mandatory Access ControlMACSystem / security labelsClassified govt / military
Role-Based Access ControlRBACAdministrator (via roles)Enterprise environments
Attribute-Based Access ControlABACPolicy engine (user + resource attributes)Fine-grained, dynamic policies
Rule-Based Access ControlRuBACSystem rules / ACLsFirewall rules, network ACLs

About these practice questions

Courseiva writes every AZ-104 question from scratch — 1,049 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 →

How Courseiva writes practice questions · Editorial policy

JA

Written by Johnson Ajibi, MSc IT Security

Senior Network & Security Engineer · founder of Courseiva

This AZ-104 practice question is part of Courseiva's free Microsoft 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 AZ-104 exam.