Courseiva
Manage Azure Identities and GovernanceeasyMultiple ChoiceObjective-mapped

AZ-104 Manage Azure Identities and Governance Practice Question

Exhibit

Access review notes

Requested access for user: auditor1
Scope needed: RG-Finance only
Permitted actions:
- View resource properties
- View tags and configuration
Prohibited actions:
- Create, update, or delete resources
- Access other resource groups

Current assignment candidates:
- Reader at subscription scope
- Reader at RG-Finance scope
- Contributor at RG-Finance scope

Based on the exhibit, an auditor needs to view all resources in RG-Finance but must not be able to make any changes. The auditor also should not have access to other resource groups. Which RBAC assignment best meets the requirement?

⚠ Common exam trap

Many candidates choose Reader at the subscription scope (Option A) thinking it is simpler and still read-only, but they overlook the requirement to restrict access to only one resource group, which subscription-level access violates due to inheritance.

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

Reader at RG-Finance scope, because it allows viewing without granting write permissions.

The Reader role at the RG-Finance scope grants read-only access to all resources within that specific resource group, preventing any modifications. This meets the auditor's requirement to view resources in RG-Finance without write permissions and without access to other resource groups, as the scope is limited to RG-Finance.

Answer analysis

Option-by-option breakdown

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

  • Reader at the subscription scope, because it is read-only and easy to manage.

    Why it's wrong here

    Reader at the subscription scope grants read-only access to every resource group and resource within the subscription, including non-finance workloads that the auditor is not authorized to see. RBAC permissions are inherited from the subscription down to all child scopes, so this assignment would give visibility far beyond RG-Finance. Even though the Reader role itself is non-destructive, the scope violates the principle of least privilege by exposing unrelated resources to the auditor. The correct approach is to scope the read-only role to the specific resource group (RG-Finance) to limit the auditor's visibility to only the finance resources they need to review.

    When this WOULD be correct

    If the requirement was to allow an auditor to view all resources across the entire subscription without making changes, and there was no restriction on accessing other resource groups, then Reader at subscription scope would be appropriate.

  • Reader at RG-Finance scope, because it allows viewing without granting write permissions.

    Why this is correct

    Reader at the resource group scope gives the auditor visibility into the resources in RG-Finance without permitting changes. This is the narrowest built-in role and scope combination that satisfies the requirement to view the group only and avoid access to other resource groups.

  • Contributor at RG-Finance scope, because the auditor needs to read tags and configuration.

    Why it's wrong here

    Contributor at the RG-Finance scope includes significant write and delete permissions, not just read access to tags and configuration. While Contributor can read all resource metadata, tags, and configuration, it also allows creating, deleting, and modifying resources within that resource group, which directly conflicts with the requirement that the auditor must not be able to make any changes. The auditor should receive a read-only role (such as Reader) that supports viewing tags and configuration without any write or management actions. Granting Contributor would expose the environment to accidental or malicious changes and is far broader than the minimal access needed for an audit.

    When this WOULD be correct

    If the auditor needed to view resources AND also required to manage tags or perform configuration changes (e.g., update tags, modify resource settings) but not delete resources, Contributor at RG-Finance scope would be appropriate.

  • Reader at the management group scope, because all finance resources are grouped there.

    Why it's wrong here

    Management group scope would likely include many subscriptions and resource groups, not just RG-Finance. That would expose far more resources than the auditor is supposed to see. The question asks for the narrowest correct scope.

    When this WOULD be correct

    If the requirement was to allow an auditor to view all resources across multiple resource groups that are all under the same management group, and there was no restriction on accessing other resource groups, then Reader at the management group scope would be appropriate.

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.

Reader at RG-Finance scope, because it allows viewing without granting write permissions.Correct answer

Why this is correct

Reader at the resource group scope gives the auditor visibility into the resources in RG-Finance without permitting changes. This is the narrowest built-in role and scope combination that satisfies the requirement to view the group only and avoid access to other resource groups.

Reader at the subscription scope, because it is read-only and easy to manage.Wrong answer — click to see why

Why this is wrong here

Reader at subscription scope grants read access to all resource groups in the subscription, including those outside RG-Finance, violating the requirement that the auditor should not have access to other resource groups.

★ When this WOULD be the correct answer

If the requirement was to allow an auditor to view all resources across the entire subscription without making changes, and there was no restriction on accessing other resource groups, then Reader at subscription scope would be appropriate.

Why candidates choose this

Candidates may think Reader is inherently safe and scope at subscription is simpler to manage, overlooking the need to restrict access to only RG-Finance.

Contributor at RG-Finance scope, because the auditor needs to read tags and configuration.Wrong answer — click to see why

Why this is wrong here

Contributor role grants write permissions (e.g., create, delete, modify resources), which violates the auditor's requirement to not make any changes. The auditor only needs read access.

★ When this WOULD be the correct answer

If the auditor needed to view resources AND also required to manage tags or perform configuration changes (e.g., update tags, modify resource settings) but not delete resources, Contributor at RG-Finance scope would be appropriate.

Why candidates choose this

Candidates may think Contributor is necessary for reading tags and configuration, but Reader already includes read access to all resource properties including tags and configuration.

Reader at the management group scope, because all finance resources are grouped there.Wrong answer — click to see why

Why this is wrong here

Reader at the management group scope grants read access to all resource groups under that management group, including those outside RG-Finance, violating the requirement that the auditor should not have access to other resource groups.

★ When this WOULD be the correct answer

If the requirement was to allow an auditor to view all resources across multiple resource groups that are all under the same management group, and there was no restriction on accessing other resource groups, then Reader at the management group scope would be appropriate.

Why candidates choose this

Candidates may assume that since all finance resources are grouped under a management group, assigning Reader at that scope is efficient and still read-only, overlooking that it grants access to other resource groups within the same management group.

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

One of 1,049 original AZ-104 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

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.