Pass the Google Google Cloud Certified Professional-Cloud-Security-Engineer Questions and answers with CertsForce

Pseudonymization is a de-identification technique that replaces sensitive data values with cryptographically generated tokens. Pseudonymization is widely used in industries like finance and healthcare to help reduce the risk of data in use, narrow compliance scope, and minimize the exposure of sensitive data to systems while preserving data utility and accuracy.

https://cloud.google.com/dlp/docs/pseudonymization

To ensure that application teams can only add users from within your organization to their groups, you need to configure the group settings in the Google Workspace Admin console. Here are the steps:

Access Google Workspace Admin Console:

Go to the Google Workspace Admin console.

Navigate to the Groups section.

Configure Group Settings:

Select the relevant groups used by the application teams.

Go to the group settings and set the group to only allow members from your domain.

This prevents external users from being added to these groups.

Apply and Save Changes:

Apply the changes to ensure that only users from within your organization can be added to these groups.

Verify Configuration:

Test the configuration by attempting to add an external user to the group and verifying that it is not allowed.

Benefits:

Security: Prevents unauthorized access by ensuring that only internal users can be added to groups.

Compliance: Helps in adhering to organizational policies regarding user access and management.

References

Google Workspace Admin Help: Groups

https://cloud.google.com/vpc/docs/firewalls#service-accounts-vs-tags

https://cloud.google.com/vpc/docs/firewalls#service-accounts-vs-tags

A service account represents an identity associated with an instance. Only one service account can be associated with an instance. You control access to the service account by controlling the grant of the Service Account User role for other IAM principals. For an IAM principal to start an instance by using a service account, that principal must have the Service Account User role to at least use that service account and appropriate permissions to create instances (for example, having the Compute Engine Instance Admin role to the project).

The problem describes an application with two Cloud Run services (Service A - frontend, Service B - backend) and requires setting up IAM with the principle of least privilege. Service A calls Service B.

Principle of Least Privilege: This principle dictates that each entity (in this case, a Cloud Run service) should only have the minimum permissions necessary to perform its function.

Separate Service Accounts for Separate Services: To adhere to the principle of least privilege, it's best practice to assign a unique service account to each distinct service or component. This ensures that a compromise of one service account does not grant excessive permissions across other services. Service A needs permissions to run itself and to invoke Service B. Service B only needs permissions to run itself.Extract Reference: "Assign a service account to a Cloud Run service. The service account acts as the identity for your service and determines what permissions your revisions have when executing requests. It is a best practice to grant each service account only the permissions that are required to run the specific service (principle of least privilege)." (Google Cloud documentation: https://cloud.google.com/run/docs/configuring/service-accounts)

Authentication for Cloud Run Services: When one Cloud Run service (caller) needs to invoke another Cloud Run service (callee), the caller must be authorized to do so. This is typically achieved by assigning the roles/run.invoker role on the callee service to the caller's service account.Extract Reference: "To allow a service to invoke another service, grant the roles/run.invoker role on the called service to the caller's service account." (Google Cloud documentation: https://cloud.google.com/run/docs/securing/service-to-service)

Let's evaluate the options:

A. Create a new service account with the permissions to run service A and service B. Require authentication for service B. Permit only the new service account to call the backend. This violates the principle of least privilege by giving a single service account permissions for both services. If that service account were compromised, both services would be affected.

B. Create two separate service accounts. Grant one service account the permissions to execute service A, and grant the other service account the permissions to execute service B. Require authentication for service B. Permit only the service account for service A to call the back-end. This aligns perfectly with least privilege. Service A gets its own identity, Service B gets its own identity. Service A's service account is then granted run.invoker permissions on Service B, allowing it to call the backend while Service B requires authentication. This is the recommended approach.

C. Use the Compute Engine default service account to run service A and service B. Require authentication for service B. Permit only the default service account to call the backend. The Compute Engine default service account often has broad permissions (e.g., editor role in its project). Using it violates the principle of least privilege and is generally discouraged for production applications due to the potential for excessive permissions.

D. Create three separate service accounts. Grant one service account the permissions to execute service A. Grant the second service account the permissions to run service B. Grant the third service account the permissions to communicate between both services A and B. Require authentication for service B. Call the back-end by authenticating with a service account key for the third service account. This introduces unnecessary complexity with a third service account just for communication. More critically, using a service account key for authentication is generally discouraged in Cloud Run environments where ADC (Application Default Credentials) can be used, as managing keys securely becomes an operational overhead and security risk. Cloud Run services automatically use their attached service accounts for authentication when making calls to other Google Cloud services, including other Cloud Run services.

Therefore, option B is the best solution, adhering to the principle of least privilege and Google Cloud best practices for Cloud Run service-to-service authentication.

Rotating a user-managed Service Account key involves creating a new key, updating your application to use the new key, and then deleting the old key to maintain security. Here’s the step-by-step process:

Create a New Key: Use the Google Cloud Console or gcloud command-line tool to create a new key for the service account. This generates a new key pair and provides you with the private key.

gcloud iam service-accounts keys create new-key-file.json --iam-account=YOUR_SERVICE_ACCOUNT_EMAIL

Update Application: Update your application configuration to use the new key. This might involve replacing the old key file with the new one or updating the environment variables or configurations that point to the key file.

Delete the Old Key: Once you have confirmed that the application is working correctly with the new key, delete the old key from the service account to ensure it cannot be used for unauthorized access.

gcloud iam service-accounts keys delete OLD_KEY_ID --iam-account=YOUR_SERVICE_ACCOUNT_EMAIL

This process ensures that your service account keys are regularly rotated, reducing the risk of key compromise.

References

Managing Service Account Keys

Service Account Key Rotation

To fulfill the requirements of preserving logs for 12 years and ensuring data residency within European boundaries, the best approach is to use Google Cloud's operations suite (formerly Stackdriver) with a custom log bucket configured in the desired region.

Configure Cloud Logging Agent:

Install and configure the Cloud Logging agent on your Compute Engine instances. This agent collects logs from your application and system and sends them to Google Cloud's operations suite.

Create a Custom Log Bucket:

In the Cloud Logging interface, create a custom log bucket in the EUROPE-WEST1 region. This bucket will store your logs and can be configured with a custom retention period.

Set Custom Retention Policy:

Configure the retention policy for the custom log bucket to 12 years. This ensures that all logs are preserved for the required duration.

Ship Logs to the Custom Log Bucket:

Modify the logging configuration to direct logs from the Cloud Logging agent to the custom log bucket. This can be done through the logging configuration settings in the Cloud Console or by updating the agent configuration files.

This solution minimizes overhead by using managed services and ensures cost-effectiveness by leveraging Cloud Logging's built-in capabilities for log storage and retention management.

References

Cloud Logging Documentation

Creating and Managing Logs Buckets

The requirements are a combination of preventative and detective controls (prevent and detect misconfigurations) applied at the Folder level to meet both industry-specific (predefined standards) and internal/custom policies. The dedicated Google Cloud feature for this is Security Posture Management in Security Command Center (SCC).

Postures and Enforcement: A Security Posture is a feature within SCC Premium/Enterprise that allows you to define, deploy, and monitor the security status of your cloud assets. You can deploy postures at the organization, folder, or project level to enforce standards.

Custom and Predefined Policies: A posture combines both:

Predefined Policies: Using Security Health Analytics (SHA) detectors and mapped standards (like CIS, ISO 27001, PCI DSS) covers the industry-specific compliance requirements (detection).

Custom Policies: Using custom Organization Policy constraints and custom SHA modules allows you to enforce and detect your internal company policies (prevention and detection).

Extracts:

"In Google Cloud, you can use the security posture service in Security Command Center to define and deploy a security posture, monitor the security status of your Google Cloud resources..." (Source 2.3)

"You can deploy postures at the organization level, folder level, or project level." (Source 2.3)

"The security posture service includes the following components: Posture. One or more policy sets that enforce the preventative and detective controls that your organization requires to meet its security standard... Supported policies are the following: Organization Policy constraints, including custom constraints [Preventative]. Security Health Analytics detectors, including custom modules [Detective]." (Source 2.3, 8.2)

Option C correctly identifies the comprehensive solution for both prevention and detection using a Posture file, which supports custom and predefined policies enforced at the required scope (folder).

For external applications (outside of Google Cloud) to access resources securely, Workload Identity Federation (WIF) is the modern standard.3 It avoids the use of permanent service account keys and relies on external identity providers (OIDC or SAML) to exchange short-lived Google Cloud tokens.

According to Google Cloud Documentation (Workload Identity Federation):

"You can use Workload Identity Federation to grant on-premises or multi-cloud workloads access to Google Cloud resources without using a service account key. This reduces the risk associated with long-lived service account keys and simplifies the implementation of security best practices."

Key points:

It allows external identities (from AWS, Azure, or OIDC/SAML providers) to assume a Google IAM role.

The access is short-lived and scoped to specifically what the application needs (e.g., storage.objects.create).

Why other options are incorrect:

A is incorrect: Long-lived service account keys are a security liability.

B is incorrect: While a proxy works, it adds architectural complexity and overhead compared to direct federation.

C is incorrect: IP-based ACLs are weak because IPs can be spoofed or changed, and Cloud Storage ACLs do not provide robust identity-based security for public-facing apps.

Web Security Scanner is designed to scan your web applications deployed on Google Cloud for common vulnerabilities, including cross-site scripting (XSS). It can authenticate using Google accounts and can be scheduled to run scans regularly.

Steps:

Enable Web Security Scanner: In the Google Cloud Console, enable Web Security Scanner for your project.

Configure Scan: Set up the scan configuration, specifying the target URLs, authentication details (Google accounts), and scan frequency (at least once per week).

Run and Monitor Scans: Run the scans and monitor the results for vulnerabilities, addressing any issues found.

Workforce Identity Federation is the modern, Google-recommended way to grant external partners access to Google Cloud resources using their own identity provider (IdP). This avoids the "Identity Lifecycle Management" burden of creating guest accounts in your own directory.

According to Google Cloud Documentation (Workforce Identity Federation Overview):

"Workforce Identity Federation lets you use an external identity provider (IdP) to authenticate and authorize a workforce—a group of users, such as employees, partners, and contractors—so that the users can access Google Cloud services. With Workforce Identity Federation, you don't need to synchronize user identities from your existing IdP to Google Cloud identities."

Advantages of this approach:

Syncless: You don't create or manage partner accounts in your Cloud Identity/Workspace (eliminating Option C).

Security: If a partner employee leaves their company, their access to your Google Cloud database is automatically revoked when their home IdP account is disabled.

Scoped Access: You grant IAM roles (like roles/cloudsql.client) specifically to the Workforce Pool or specific groups within that pool, ensuring they can't touch other resources.

Why other options are incorrect:

A is incorrect: Public IPs are a major security risk and don't provide centralized identity governance.

B is incorrect: You cannot "grant access" to accounts in another organization's Cloud Identity directly in a secure, manageable way for production databases without federation.