A financial enterprise is securing communications between its Google Cloud VPC network and Google APIs to prevent data exfiltration. The security architect has established the following requirements: Global VPC workloads must be restricted so that they can only access Google APIs and services that are supported by VPC Service Controls (VPC-SC), automatically blocking calls to unsupported Google services. A dedicated analytics tier must consume Google APIs using an internal IP address allocated directly from the VPC subnet's private RFC 1918 range, allowing fine-grained VPC firewall rule enforcement and monitoring without routing to shared public VIP ranges. Which combination of private connectivity architectures should the architect implement?

Configure Cloud DNS response policies to map `*.googleapis.com` to `restricted.googleapis.com` (`199.36.153.4/30`) for VPC-wide egress, and deploy a Private Service Connect (PSC) endpoint for Google APIs with an allocated internal IP in the analytics subnet.: What this solution is This architecture combines Restricted Google Access via the restricted.googleapis.com domain with a Private Service Connect (PSC) endpoint for Google APIs. restricted.googleapis.com maps API domain names to a specific virtual IP range (199.36.153.4/30) that strictly permits communication only with Google services supported by VPC Service Controls (VPC-SC), while Private Service Connect projects Google API services directly into a consumer VPC network using a private RFC 1918 internal IP address. How it meets the requirements Restricting VPC-wide egress to VPC-SC supported services: Configuring internal DNS zones or Cloud DNS Response Policies to resolve *.googleapis.com and related domains to restricted.googleapis.com (199.36.153.4/30) ensures that compute workloads can only communicate with services verified to support VPC-SC perimeters. Any API call to a non-supported service (such as consumer web apps or unsupported APIs) is blocked at the network layer. Direct private IP allocation in the analytics tier: Deploying a Private Service Connect endpoint creates a forwarding rule using an internal IP address directly drawn from the analytics subnet. Workloads can route API traffic to this local IP, allowing network administrators to attach granular VPC firewall rules to monitor and restrict traffic to that specific internal IP without relying on external or shared VIP ranges. Key advantages and capabilities Preventative exfiltration controls: Enforces boundary protection by preventing data movement to unauthorized or non-perimeter-protected Google Cloud services. Subnet-native integration: PSC endpoints treat Google services as internal network endpoints inside the consumer VPC, enabling native VPC routing, VPC Flow Logs analysis, and microsegmentation. No transitive routing issues: Unlike VPC peering or complex proxy configurations, PSC utilizes Layer 4 endpoint forwarding. Hybrid extensibility: Both the restricted.googleapis.com VIP and PSC internal IP endpoints can be advertised across Cloud Interconnect or Cloud VPN to extend security postures to on-premises hosts. Why this is optimal This dual approach applies the exact native mechanism intended for broad VPC-SC enforcement across the VPC (restricted.googleapis.com) while providing the dedicated analytics tier with private, subnet-bound addressing and firewall control via Private Service Connect.

Restricted Google Access And Private Service Connect | Professional Cloud Security Engineer

AdvancedProfessional Cloud Security Engineer

An enterprise requires on-premises workloads to privately access Google Cloud APIs and services without routing traffic over the public internet. The on-premises data center is connected to a Google Cloud Virtual Private Cloud (VPC) network via Cloud Interconnect. To comply with security policies, the API communication must be restricted to services supported by VPC Service Controls. Which combination of DNS and routing configurations should the enterprise implement?

Establishing private connectivity between VPC and Google APIs (Private Google Access, Private Google Access for on-premises hosts, restricted Google access, Private Service Connect).

AdvancedProfessional Cloud Security Engineer

An enterprise is deploying Compute Engine virtual machines without external IP addresses in a custom subnet (10.10.1.0/24). The workloads need to securely communicate with Cloud Storage and Artifact Registry while preventing data exfiltration to non-supported external services by leveraging an active VPC Service Controls security perimeter. The VPC network enforces a strict baseline egress policy with an explicit low-priority deny rule for 0.0.0.0/0. Which set of actions should the security engineer take to establish connectivity while maintaining network isolation and security perimeter enforcement?

Establishing private connectivity between VPC and Google APIs (Private Google Access, Private Google Access for on-premises hosts, restricted Google access, Private Service Connect).

AdvancedProfessional Cloud Security Engineer

A multinational financial enterprise is designing its cloud compliance and security operations framework on Google Cloud. The compliance team requires strict adherence to the Google Cloud shared responsibility model regarding Identity and Access Management (IAM), incident response, and service-to-service automation. During a compliance audit of their project baseline configurations, the security team identifies the following conditions: Automated pipeline service accounts and human operators have been granted service agent roles (such as roles/securitycenter.securityResponseServiceAgent and roles/cloudsql.admin) to perform routine operations. Default service accounts are being used across compute and database resources without customized IAM boundaries. Which operational governance action should the security team implement to align with shared responsibility and least privilege principles?

Evaluating the shared responsibility model.

AdvancedProfessional Cloud Security Engineer

An enterprise organization is designing a zero-trust network perimeter architecture for sensitive backend workloads hosted on Google Cloud Compute Engine instances across multiple VPC networks. The security engineering team has established the following technical requirements: Automatically block all inbound and outbound traffic associated with known malicious IP addresses and Tor exit nodes without maintaining static IP lists. Intercept and perform deep Layer 7 Intrusion Prevention System (IPS) inspection on encrypted TLS egress traffic to protect against malware, spyware, and command-and-control communication. Provide secure administrative SSH access to the instances without assigning external IP addresses or operating dedicated bastion hosts, while enforcing identity- and context-based access policies. Which combination of actions should the security team implement?

Configuring network perimeter controls (e.g., Cloud Next Generation Firewall [Cloud NGFW] rules and policies, Identity-Aware Proxy [IAP], load balancers, and Certificate Authority Service).

AdvancedProfessional Cloud Security Engineer

A financial enterprise is implementing an organizational security architecture in Google Cloud to meet strict compliance mandates for data at rest across regional workloads. The security team has established the following requirements: All newly created storage and database resources must strictly use Customer-Managed Encryption Keys (CMEK) rather than Google default encryption. Encryption keys must be centrally managed in dedicated security projects, preventing workload project teams from creating or selecting keys in unauthorized projects. Workload service identities must be granted only the minimum necessary cryptographic permissions required for envelope encryption. Which combination of organization policies and Identity and Access Management (IAM) configurations should the security engineer implement?

Applying encryption methods to various use cases.

AdvancedProfessional Cloud DevOps Engineer

A DevOps team is managing access across a multi-tier Google Cloud resource hierarchy. A developer reports that they are unable to delete objects from a specific Cloud Storage bucket in a production project, despite having the Storage Object Admin (roles/storage.objectAdmin) role directly granted to their identity on that bucket. During your investigation of the resource hierarchy, you identify the following IAM configurations: Organization level: An IAM deny policy denies storage.objects.delete to all members of the developer group. Folder level: An IAM allow policy grants the developer group the Storage Object Viewer (roles/storage.objectViewer) role. Project level: No direct allow or deny bindings are configured for the developer. Bucket level: An IAM allow policy directly grants the developer the Storage Object Admin (roles/storage.objectAdmin) role. How does Google Cloud IAM evaluate these cumulative policies to determine the developer's effective permissions on the bucket?

Identity and Access Management (IAM) roles and organization-level policies

Professional Cloud Security Engineer

Restricted Google Access And Private Service Connect

Related questions

Professional Cloud Security Engineer

Restricted Google Access And Private Service Connect

What this solution is

How it meets the requirements

Key advantages and capabilities

Why this is optimal

Related questions

What this solution is

How it meets the requirements

Key advantages and capabilities

Why this is optimal