Identity-Security-Administrator SailPoint Certified Identity Security Administrator Questions and Answers

This proposed API call is not valid for retrieving Virtual Appliance connector logs. The identifier shown in the log entry is a managed-cluster ID , yet the proposed URL incorrectly places that ID under the /v3/sources/ API resource. Managed clusters and sources are separate Identity Security Cloud objects and use different API endpoints.

SailPoint's documented Managed Clusters API provides operations for obtaining cluster details and for retrieving or modifying the cluster's log configuration , such as GET /managed-clusters/{id}/log-config and PUT /managed-clusters/{id}/log-config. It does not document a GET /v3/sources/{managedClusterId}/logs endpoint for exporting VA connector log files.

For connector troubleshooting, enhanced logging can be enabled against the appropriate managed cluster, the problematic operation reproduced, and the resulting VA/connector logs collected through the supported VA troubleshooting process. The administrator must also ensure that the correct cluster associated with the affected source is being investigated.

Therefore, the proposed endpoint confuses a managed cluster with a source and does not represent a supported log-export API.

Study Guide Reference: Virtual Appliances — Managed Clusters, Connector Logging, VA Troubleshooting and SailPoint REST APIs.

===============

This is a valid remediation step. Identity Security Cloud allows certifications to be reassigned when the original reviewer cannot complete the assigned review. A reviewer leaving the organization is precisely the type of situation in which reassignment is appropriate because governance decisions must still be completed by an authorized reviewer.

SailPoint documents that an administrator can open an active certification campaign, identify a certification whose reviewer has not signed off, and use Reassign to select another qualified user. The system also protects against self-certification by validating that the new reviewer is not being asked to certify their own access. A certification that has already been signed off cannot simply be reassigned in the same manner.

Administrators can additionally configure work reassignment to redirect certifications and other governance work when users are unavailable. This supports temporary absences as well as permanent situations where an identity should no longer receive governance work.

Therefore, administrator-initiated reassignment is the correct way to preserve campaign completion and accountability.

Study Guide Reference: Supporting Governance — Certification Campaigns, Reassigning Certifications, Reviewer Availability and Self-Review Prevention.

===============

This approach satisfies the stated provisioning requirements. Identity Security Cloud roles can use identity attributes such as department as assignment criteria. Therefore, a standard role can be configured so that identities whose department equals Finance automatically qualify for the role, regardless of whether their employment type is employee or contractor.

The role can then contain the Office 365 E3 entitlement, either directly or through an appropriate access profile. When an identity satisfies role membership criteria, Identity Security Cloud automatically assigns the role and provisions its associated access to the identity's applicable source account. When the identity ceases to meet the criteria, the role and associated provisioned access can be removed.

This design does not indiscriminately assign a default Office 365 license to contractors throughout the organization. It targets Finance identities and grants the specific E3 access required by the scenario. It also avoids deliberately assigning both the default license and E3 license to the same Finance identity.

Study Guide Reference: Provisioning — Automated Role Assignment, Identity Attribute Criteria, Role-Based Provisioning and Entitlement Assignment.

===============

The statement is not accurate as written. Configuration Hub restoration does use a draft , but an administrator cannot simply add arbitrary missing configuration objects to an existing draft through the normal draft-editing process.

The supported restoration workflow is to select the required backup, create a deployment draft, review the differences between the backup and the live tenant, optionally edit supported object details or remove objects that should not be deployed, and then deploy the draft. Configuration Hub automatically evaluates dependencies and identifies reference issues while preparing the draft.

Current SailPoint documentation specifically states that administrators can edit JSON definitions of existing draft objects or remove objects/object types. If an administrator removes an object from the draft and later discovers that this was a mistake, the supported action is to create a new draft from the backup and start again . There is no general "add missing object" operation to repopulate an existing draft.

Therefore, reviewing the draft is correct, but the proposed mechanism of editing and adding missing objects makes the overall statement invalid.

Study Guide Reference: Platform — Configuration Hub, Backups, Configuration Drafts and Restoring Tenant Configuration.

===============

The statement is correct. Identity Security Cloud workflows consist of triggers, actions, operators, and control-flow relationships. Each workflow action requires a name that uniquely identifies the step within that workflow. The name is operationally significant because subsequent steps and conditional logic reference workflow actions by their names.

SailPoint specifically documents that every workflow action has a name and that the action name must be unique within the workflow so it can be referenced correctly in next-step definitions and conditional logic. The workflow builder can automatically generate the initial name based on the action type, but administrators can rename steps where clearer naming improves workflow readability.

If two workflow actions shared the same underlying step name, references could become ambiguous and workflow execution could not reliably determine which action's output or transition was intended. This is particularly important because action output becomes part of the workflow data flow and can be referenced by later steps.

Therefore, uniqueness is a functional requirement rather than merely a user-interface naming preference.

Study Guide Reference: Platform — Workflows, Workflow Actions, Step Names, Data Flow and Conditional Logic.

===============

The statement is valid. In Identity Security Cloud, entitlements represent individual access rights or permissions that exist on connected sources. The specific form of an entitlement depends on the target system. Examples can include Active Directory groups, application roles, permission sets, security groups, database privileges, or other source-specific access constructs.

Entitlements form a fundamental layer of SailPoint's access model. Administrators can combine one or more entitlements from the same source into an access profile. Access profiles can then be incorporated into roles to create higher-level business access models.

Because SailPoint aggregates entitlement information from connected sources, administrators can govern these access rights through certifications, access requests, provisioning processes, role management, and policy analysis. Entitlement metadata can also provide meaningful descriptions and ownership information so reviewers understand the access being governed.

Therefore, describing entitlements as specific access rights on a source precisely reflects their role in Identity Security Cloud's access governance architecture.

Study Guide Reference: Access Management — Entitlements, Access Profiles, Roles and Access Model Fundamentals.

===============

This statement correctly describes the purpose of Separation of Duties (SoD) policies. In identity governance, a toxic combination is a set of access privileges that becomes excessively risky when possessed by the same identity. A typical example would be combining permission to create a supplier with permission to approve payments to that supplier. Either permission may be legitimate independently, while the combined privileges create an unacceptable control conflict.

Identity Security Cloud implements SoD by allowing administrators to construct policies containing conflicting sets of access. Human identities possessing access from both sides of the defined conflict can generate policy violations that administrators and designated violation owners can investigate, remediate, or mitigate. SailPoint describes SoD as an internal control that provides visibility into risky access combinations and helps organizations identify where policy violations exist.

Therefore, SoD policies are specifically designed to identify and govern the toxic combinations of privileges described in the statement.

Study Guide Reference: Supporting Governance — Separation of Duties, Conflicting Access, Toxic Combinations and SoD Policy Violations.

===============

1. Define what values are needed to onboard a user in a managed system.

Select a match:

Create Account

2. Update an identity's phone number in Active Directory.

Select a match:

Attribute Sync

3. Customizable logic to match an account to an existing identity.

Select a match:

Correlation Rule

4. Supports user management in Active Directory.

Select a match:

IQService

The correct mappings correspond directly to the functions of SailPoint Identity Security Cloud provisioning and integration components. Create Account defines the account attributes and values that Identity Security Cloud uses when provisioning a new account on a managed source. SailPoint states that the Create Account configuration specifies which attributes are populated and how their values are determined.

Attribute Sync keeps account attributes on a target source synchronized with identity attributes. Therefore, if an identity's mapped phone-number attribute changes, Attribute Sync can provision the corresponding change to Active Directory.

A Correlation Rule provides customizable logic for matching source accounts to existing identities when straightforward attribute correlation is insufficient. Correlation fundamentally determines which identity owns a source account.

Finally, IQService is SailPoint's Windows service used with Active Directory to support provisioning and Windows-specific management operations. SailPoint explicitly requires IQService for Active Directory provisioning and related Windows functionality.

Study Guide Reference: Provisioning — Create Account; Attribute Sync; Account Correlation; IQService and Active Directory Integration.

The statement correctly describes Identity Security Cloud's default self-approval prevention behavior when the requester is assigned as an individual reviewer . SailPoint does not normally permit a person to approve their own access request. This applies whether the request is submitted directly for themselves or whether the affected access recipient otherwise appears as a reviewer in the approval sequence.

When the requester or recipient is assigned an approval directly as an individual, Identity Security Cloud automatically reassigns that review responsibility to the individual's manager . If a valid manager is unavailable, the system can continue through alternative fallback mechanisms, eventually reaching an administrator when necessary.

There is an important distinction for Governance Groups: if the requester belongs to a Governance Group configured as reviewer, the requester is normally omitted while other group members remain eligible to approve. Only when that user is effectively the group's sole valid reviewer does manager reassignment occur.

An optional API setting can permit auto-approval for individual reviewers, but the default behavior described by the scenario is manager reassignment.

Study Guide Reference: Access Management — Preventing Self-Approval, Approval Reassignment, Manager Review and Access Request Governance.

===============

The statement is correct. Attribute synchronization is configured at the source level because administrators must determine which account attributes on a specific governed source should remain synchronized with corresponding Identity Security Cloud identity attributes.

SailPoint's documented configuration path begins by navigating to Admin > Connections > Sources and selecting or editing the appropriate source. Within the source's Account Management section, the administrator opens Attribute Sync . Identity Security Cloud then displays the account attributes that are eligible for synchronization based on the source's Create Account definition and identity-attribute mappings. The administrator selects the attributes that should synchronize and can initiate the appropriate synchronization process.

Attribute Sync applies to existing correlated accounts. It does not independently create accounts, and an uncorrelated account cannot participate because Identity Security Cloud has no authoritative identity relationship from which to determine the target attribute values.

Therefore, accessing the source through Admin > Connections > Sources and configuring Attribute Sync from its account-management configuration is precisely the supported administrative approach.

Study Guide Reference: Provisioning — Configuring Attribute Sync, Source Account Management, Identity Attribute Mapping and Correlated Accounts.

===============

This is a valid description of Separation of Duties (SoD) as an identity-governance control. SoD policies define combinations of access that should not be held by the same identity because combining those privileges could enable fraud, unauthorized transactions, or circumvention of internal controls. A detective implementation analyzes existing access and identifies identities that already violate a defined policy, allowing administrators to investigate, mitigate, revoke access, or document an approved exception.

Preventive policy evaluation applies the same governance principle before problematic access is granted. During an access-request or provisioning process, the proposed access can be evaluated against policy rules so that a potential conflict is identified before the access change is completed. SailPoint documents SoD policies as conflicting-access definitions and also documents preventive policy evaluation in its governance model. These controls provide measurable evidence that an organization is actively enforcing access-risk policies rather than merely documenting them.

Study Guide Reference: Supporting Governance — Separation of Duties, Policy Rules, Detective and Preventive Controls.

===============

The statement is explicitly incorrect. Identity Security Cloud allows users to hold multiple User Levels in many circumstances, and permissions from compatible User Levels are cumulative. However, SailPoint defines several combinations that cannot be assigned simultaneously because their delegated administrative scopes conflict.

One of the specifically prohibited combinations is Role Admin and Source Sub-Admin . SailPoint's User Level documentation lists this pair among the User Levels that cannot coexist on the same user. Other prohibited combinations include Role Sub-Admin with Source Admin, Role Sub-Admin with Role Admin, and Source Sub-Admin with Source Admin.

The distinction is important. A Role Admin has broad role-management privileges, whereas a Source Sub-Admin receives scoped administrative capabilities based on Governance Group associations with particular sources. Combining certain global and scoped administrative models could create inconsistent authorization behavior, so SailPoint prevents those assignments.

Administrators should therefore consult the User Level compatibility matrix before granting multiple elevated permissions rather than assuming that every User Level can be stacked.

Study Guide Reference: Platform — User Level Permissions, User Level Compatibility, Role Admin and Source Sub-Admin.

===============

The statement is incorrect. Identity Security Cloud does not automatically transfer a departed reviewer's certification responsibilities to that reviewer's manager merely because of the reporting relationship. Certification ownership is explicitly assigned, and the authorized replacement process is reassignment rather than implicit managerial inheritance.

If the original reviewer cannot finish a certification, an administrator can reassign that pending certification to another qualified identity. Identity Security Cloud validates the reassignment to prevent the new reviewer from certifying their own access. A manager can also configure work reassignment for their team members when that functionality is enabled, but that still establishes an explicit reassignment rather than granting the manager unrestricted authority to enter every certification belonging to the employee.

After a campaign deadline, administrators also have campaign-level options for resolving undecided items, including completing the campaign according to the configured maintain-or-revoke behavior.

Therefore, the correct response to a departed reviewer is to use supported reassignment or campaign-completion procedures, not assume the reviewer's manager automatically acquires all pending certifications.

Study Guide Reference: Supporting Governance — Certification Reassignment, Work Reassignment, Campaign Deadlines and Reviewer Responsibilities.

===============

The statement accurately describes the cryptographic trust model underlying SAML federation. In a typical SAML configuration, the Identity Provider (IdP) authenticates the user and issues a SAML assertion. The Service Provider (SP) validates the assertion, particularly its digital signature, by using certificate/public-key information associated with the trusted IdP. Private keys remain protected by their owners; the corresponding certificates containing public keys can be exchanged through configuration or SAML metadata.

For Identity Security Cloud operating as a SAML Service Provider, SailPoint requires administrators to obtain the IdP's signing certificate and configure it in Identity Security Cloud. SailPoint also provides Service Provider metadata that can be supplied to the IdP. This establishes the federation relationship and allows the participating systems to validate SAML messages according to the configured trust model. The critical concept is that passwords are not shared between the IdP and SP. Authentication assertions are trusted because they originate from an established federation partner and can be cryptographically validated.

Study Guide Reference: Access Management — Authentication Methods, SAML Federation, Identity Provider and Service Provider Trust.

===============

The statement is incorrect. Identity Profiles remain administratively manageable after identities have been created from their associated authoritative sources. Administrators can edit supported Identity Profile properties, including identity attribute mappings, lifecycle-related configuration, ownership information, and other profile settings. When a change affects identity data, Identity Security Cloud marks the profile as requiring processing, and the administrator can use Apply Changes to recalculate affected identities.

Identity Profiles can also be managed programmatically. SailPoint exposes APIs for updating and deleting Identity Profiles. Some fields have restrictions—for example, system-generated properties cannot be modified, and changes to authoritative-source configuration and identity-attribute configuration have specific processing constraints—but the existence of identities under the profile does not make the profile permanently immutable. The V3 API explicitly provides both update and delete Identity Profile operations.

Because at least the assertion that administrators cannot modify an Identity Profile after identities are assigned is demonstrably false, the overall proposed statement is false.

Study Guide Reference: Identity and Lifecycle Management — Identity Profiles, Editing Identity Profiles, Processing Identity Changes and Identity Profile Administration.

===============

This statement is incorrect. When a role uses Identity List as its assignment type, Identity Security Cloud expects administrators to explicitly search for and select individual identities that should receive the role. SailPoint's documented procedure is to select Identity List, search for a specific identity in Add Identities , add that identity, and repeat the process for additional identities. Identity List therefore functions as an explicit membership list rather than a pattern-based membership rule.

Wildcards such as * and ? are valid in Identity Security Cloud Search queries for supported text fields. For example, Search can use patterns to find records whose names match a particular character sequence. However, that Search capability must not be confused with role Identity List assignment criteria.

If dynamic membership is required, administrators should use Standard Criteria , where identity attributes, account attributes, or entitlements can be evaluated through supported comparison operators. Identity List is appropriate when named identities are deliberately selected.

Study Guide Reference: Access Management — Roles, Automated Role Assignment, Identity List, Standard Criteria and Search Wildcards.

===============

This is not a valid explanation for why a requestable entitlement is missing. An entitlement being included in an access profile does not inherently mean that the entitlement becomes hidden from the Request Center. Identity Security Cloud supports direct entitlement requests as well as requests for access profiles that bundle multiple entitlements.

SailPoint explicitly states that entitlements can be configured for direct access requests and can also be grouped into access profiles. Likewise, access profiles can independently be configured as requestable objects. Therefore, membership in an access profile is not itself the troubleshooting condition that determines whether the underlying entitlement is requestable.

The more relevant checks are whether entitlement requests are globally enabled, whether the newly aggregated group actually exists as an entitlement in Identity Security Cloud, and whether its Requestable status is enabled. SailPoint's entitlement-request configuration explicitly requires both global enablement and entitlement-level requestability.

Consequently, assuming that the group has disappeared simply because an access profile contains it is technically incorrect.

Study Guide Reference: Access Management — Entitlements, Access Profiles, Direct Entitlement Requests and Request Center Configuration.

===============

The statement is incorrect because Attribute Sync does not synchronize entitlement information from a source into Identity Security Cloud. Its purpose is to keep selected source account attributes synchronized with corresponding identity attributes maintained in Identity Security Cloud.

For example, an organization's authoritative identity data might contain a user's department, title, or other business attribute. If a corresponding account attribute on a connected target source is configured for Attribute Sync, Identity Security Cloud can detect that the account value no longer matches the identity value and provision an update to the source account. SailPoint explicitly states that Attribute Sync uses identity information to keep account data on sources consistent with identity data.

Entitlements are handled through separate aggregation mechanisms. Entitlement aggregation imports entitlement objects and their metadata from external sources into Identity Security Cloud.

Therefore, the proposed statement confuses two distinct processes: Attribute Sync pushes identity-derived account-attribute changes toward target accounts, whereas entitlement aggregation loads entitlement information from governed sources.

Study Guide Reference: Provisioning — Attribute Synchronization, Identity-to-Account Attribute Mapping and Entitlement Aggregation.

===============

Yes. This is a classic Separation of Duties scenario. The individual requesting a significant system configuration change should not also possess the authority to independently approve that same change. Combining requester and approver responsibilities eliminates an important independent-control checkpoint and allows one person to initiate and authorize a potentially high-impact administrative operation.

SailPoint's official SoD guidance specifically uses major system configuration changes as an example: significant configuration changes should be approved by someone other than the person requesting the change. SoD policies are designed to identify and govern combinations of access that would enable such conflicting responsibilities.

From a governance perspective, the requester initiates the business or technical need, while an independent reviewer determines whether the requested change is appropriate, authorized, and sufficiently controlled. Separating these functions reduces fraud, accidental misconfiguration, privilege abuse, and unauthorized system modification. Where conflicting access already exists, Identity Security Cloud can identify the associated SoD violation for investigation and remediation.

Therefore, allowing the requester to approve their own major system change represents exactly the type of control conflict that SoD is intended to prevent.

Study Guide Reference: Supporting Governance — Separation of Duties, Requester/Approver Conflicts, Internal Controls and SoD Policy Enforcement.

===============

The statement is incorrect. A source in Identity Security Cloud is not primarily a backup-storage repository. A source represents an enterprise system from which Identity Security Cloud obtains account, identity, and access information or to which it performs supported provisioning operations.

SailPoint defines a source as the Identity Security Cloud representation of a third-party enterprise application, database, or directory-management system that maintains its own accounts or personnel records. Connectors are used to interact with those systems so Identity Security Cloud can aggregate accounts and access rights and associate that information with identities.

Examples include Active Directory, HR applications, databases, SaaS platforms, and flat-file feeds. Depending on connector capabilities and configuration, a source can support account aggregation, entitlement aggregation, account creation and modification, enable/disable operations, password management, and entitlement provisioning.

Backup and disaster-recovery functions are separate concerns. Configuration Hub, for example, backs up supported Identity Security Cloud configuration objects , but that does not redefine enterprise sources as backup systems.

Study Guide Reference: Sources — Source Definitions, Connectors, Account and Entitlement Aggregation, Source Management.

===============

This is a valid troubleshooting action. Identity Security Cloud provides administrators with centralized visibility into pending access requests through Approval Management / Approvals Administration . An administrator can select an access request and inspect its processing details rather than relying only on the status visible to the requester.

The request's Process view displays the progression of the approval and provisioning workflow. It identifies completed, active, and future steps and can show which approver or governance group currently owns an outstanding review. Where multiple reviewers are involved, administrators can expand approval stages to inspect individual reviewer status. The Assignees information also identifies who is currently responsible for approving the request.

This makes the administrative view particularly useful when a request appears "stuck." The administrator can determine whether it is waiting for approval, escalation, provisioning, or another processing stage and then take an appropriate supported action such as reminding or reassigning an approver.

Therefore, reviewing the request's administrative process flow is an appropriate first-line diagnostic step.

Study Guide Reference: Access Management — Approvals Administration, Tracking Access Requests, Approval Workflow and Pending Request Troubleshooting.

===============

This is a valid troubleshooting approach. An Active Directory provisioning failure such as "There is no such object on the server" indicates that the connector attempted an operation against an object or directory reference that Active Directory could not resolve. Potential causes include an account or group being deleted or moved, an outdated distinguished name, an invalid entitlement reference, replication timing, or a provisioning operation targeting an object that no longer exists.

Searching SailPoint's technical knowledge and community resources for the exact connector error is therefore useful because connector-specific errors often have previously documented causes, configuration considerations, and remediation patterns. This should complement—not replace—tenant-side investigation. An administrator should correlate the error with provisioning activity, source information, account state, and the target system. Identity Security Cloud provides Search and audit information for investigating provisioning activity, while SailPoint technical resources provide additional connector-specific context. Current SailPoint documentation explicitly identifies provisioning activity as auditable and searchable.

Study Guide Reference: Provisioning — Troubleshooting Provisioning Errors, Active Directory Connector Operations, SailPoint Support Resources.

===============

Yes. Identity Security Cloud identity profiles support stronger verification for password-reset and account-unlock operations. When two-factor authentication is enabled for these functions, users must successfully complete two configured identity-verification methods before Identity Security Cloud permits the password reset operation. SailPoint explicitly documents this behavior under the identity profile's Password Reset and User Unlock settings.

Available verification methods can include a verification code or call to a configured phone number, a verification message delivered to an email address, security questions, Helpdesk-provided codes, or supported external MFA integrations. Administrators must ensure that the underlying identity attributes—such as phone numbers and email addresses—contain valid data when those methods are selected.

This password-reset authentication control should be distinguished from the Multifactor Authentication Sign-In Method , which uses an authenticator application to protect normal Identity Security Cloud sign-in. Both mechanisms strengthen authentication, but they protect different stages of account access.

Study Guide Reference: Access Management — Identity Profile Security Settings, Two-Factor Authentication, Password Reset and User Unlock Methods.

===============

This is a correct troubleshooting step. Enabling Entitlement Requests globally makes entitlement requesting available to the organization, but it does not automatically make every aggregated entitlement available in the Request Center. Individual entitlements must also be marked as requestable.

SailPoint specifically supports managing this setting from the source. An administrator can navigate to Admin > Connections > Sources , select the source, open Entitlement Management > Entitlements , locate the required entitlement, and verify whether it is marked as requestable. The entitlement can then be updated through the applicable Actions menu. SailPoint also exposes requestable status centrally from the Access Model > Entitlements page.

Because the missing access corresponds to recently added directory groups, the administrator should also ensure that an entitlement aggregation has successfully loaded the groups into Identity Security Cloud. If the group exists but is not requestable, users will not receive the expected direct entitlement-request experience.

Therefore, checking the entitlement's Requestable status is a technically appropriate diagnostic action.

Study Guide Reference: Sources — Entitlement Management, Entitlement Aggregation, Requestable Entitlements and Access Request Configuration.

===============

The proposed sequence is incorrect because the administrator should not first apply the Identity Profile's Block Access From settings before defining the underlying network and geography restrictions.

Identity Security Cloud tenant restrictions are configured in two logical stages. First, the organization defines the networks and geographic rules that determine what locations are trusted or untrusted. Network restrictions are based on configured IP address ranges, while geographic restrictions can use trusted or blocked-country definitions. After these global security definitions exist, restrictions are applied to specific user populations through their Identity Profiles.

The Identity Profile does indeed contain Block Access From options such as Off Network and Untrusted Geography, so that part of the statement identifies a real configuration location. However, SailPoint explicitly warns that enabling Off Network without first defining an applicable network can block all users associated with that identity profile from accessing Identity Security Cloud.

Therefore, selecting Block Access From is a required application step, but describing it as the first configuration action makes the proposed solution invalid.

Study Guide Reference: Access Management — Restricting Tenant Access, Network Definitions, Geographic Restrictions and Identity Profile Security.

===============

The statement correctly describes the communication model used by SailPoint Virtual Appliances. The critical architectural principle is that communication between a customer-hosted VA and Identity Security Cloud is initiated outbound from the VA . SailPoint does not establish unsolicited inbound connections from its cloud environment directly into the customer's VA.

SailPoint specifically documents that each VA makes continuous outbound-only calls to the cloud environment and polls the cluster queue for requested actions , including aggregation and provisioning work. The appliance retrieves the work assigned to its cluster, executes the appropriate connector operation against the customer source, and communicates the resulting information back to Identity Security Cloud.

This polling model is significant from a network-security perspective because customers do not need to create inbound firewall rules allowing Identity Security Cloud to initiate sessions into their internal environment. Instead, the VA requires appropriate outbound connectivity to SailPoint's required endpoints.

Therefore, describing VAs as initiating communication to their cluster queue accurately reflects the supported VA architecture.

Study Guide Reference: Virtual Appliances — VA Cluster Architecture, Cluster Queue Polling, Outbound-Only Communication and Connector Operations.

===============