What are two challenges that are faced by traditional defense-in-depth security solutions? (Choose two.)

Question

Options

• AApplying security policy is generally by manual and static methods
• BThey require that all components be provided by a single vendor
• CLarge amounts of logged data lead to poor threat visibility.
• DThey mandate network change control
• ESecurity services must be outsourced.

• A
  3% (1)
• B
  86% (32)
• D
  8% (3)
• E
  3% (1)

Explanation

Options B and C identify two structural weaknesses baked into traditional defense-in-depth architectures.

Why B is correct: Traditional defense-in-depth suites often evolve into tightly coupled, vendor-locked ecosystems. When all components must come from a single vendor, organizations lose flexibility - they can't easily adopt best-in-class tools, and a gap in that vendor's portfolio becomes a gap in the entire security posture.

Why C is correct: Layering many independent security controls (firewalls, IDS, AV, DLP, etc.) generates enormous volumes of log data from disconnected sources. Without unified correlation, defenders are buried in noise - more data actually reduces actionable threat visibility rather than improving it.

Why the distractors are wrong: A (manual/static policy) describes a real IT problem but is not the defining challenge specific to defense-in-depth architecture as an approach. D (mandating change control) is a general network governance process, not a defense-in-depth limitation. E (outsourcing) has no inherent relationship to whether a security design uses layered defenses.

Memory tip: Think "B-C = Bound to one vendor, Can't see the threats" - vendor lock-in limits your tool choices, and log overload blinds your analysts despite having lots of data.

No community discussion yet for this question.