Cloud Security Logic Flaw: False Negative in Device Compliance
Short answer
C The OS version was below 10, triggering a false negative due to a logic flaw in the compliance evaluation code.
Question
Which of the following most likely occurred when the employee connected a personally owned Windows laptop and was allowed on the network?

Key Takeaways
The exam tests your ability to trace conditional logic in code; the trap is assuming any non-compliant device is blocked, while this specific logic allows older OS versions through.
This question analyzes a logical flaw in a cloud-based device compliance system where an OS version check below Windows 10 incorrectly returns COMPLIANT, resulting in a false negative.
Common mistake: Many learners choose B, assuming the MDM agent was missing, but they overlook the critical flaw in the 'Else' branch of the OS version check that bypasses the agent requirement for old OSs.
Expert Analysis
Why the Answer Is Correct
The provided pseudocode contains a logical vulnerability in its conditional structure. The first condition checks if OSVersion >= 10. If this evaluates to true, it proceeds to check if the agentRunning flag is true. However, if the OS version is less than 10 (e.g., Windows 7 or 8), the first condition is false, and the execution jumps directly to the else block, which returns COMPLIANT. Since the employee's personal laptop was allowed on the network despite being against policy, it must have triggered this else path. This represents a false negative because the system failed to identify a non-compliant device (an unauthorized OS version) as non-compliant.
Why the Other Options Are Wrong
Option A is incorrect because a false positive would mean the system flagged a compliant device as non-compliant, preventing connection, whereas the device connected successfully. Option B suggests the OS was valid but the agent was missing; however, if the OS were Windows 10/11 and the agent missing, the code would correctly return NON_COMPLIANT (a true positive), blocking the device. Option D describes a scenario where the device is clearly non-compliant (OS > 11 is invalid per policy, though technically high versions are usually fine, the prompt implies strict 10/11) and the agent is running, which would likely trigger a different error or be a true negative if the system worked correctly, but doesn't explain the unauthorized access via the logic flaw.
Community Comment Notes
Community consensus strongly favors C, with many users noting the 'flaw' in the code. As Wole_excel noted, the logic incorrectly returns COMPLIANT for OS < 10. Several commenters initially chose B but corrected themselves after tracing the if-else flow, realizing that the OS version check takes precedence and has a dangerous default outcome in its else branch.
Exam Strategy
Always trace the exact path of execution in pseudo-code questions. Pay close attention to the else branches of primary conditions, as they often contain the security gaps or logic errors tested in CAS-005 scenarios.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is a false negative in device compliance?
Why isn't this a true positive?
Community Votes
91% of anonymous learners picked answer C. Votes are pick records left by other test-takers — they are not the verified answer.
Discussion 8 contributions
Compiled from public community threads and reader submissions, lightly edited for clarity. Handles and vote tallies are shown as recorded, and comments reflect the views of individual contributors.
From public community threads 8
-
Wole_excel 👍 7 Answered CIf OSVersion >= 10: If agentRunning: return COMPLIANT Else: return NON_COMPLIANT Else: return COMPLIANT # <-- flaw! If OS < 10 → the system still marks it compliant. This means Windows 7/8 devices (personal laptops, not allowed by policy) would slip through. Where the flaw is If the OS = Windows 7/8 (i.e., below 10) → the logic incorrectly returns COMPLIANT. That means a non-compliant device (old Windows OS, no agent) was wrongly marked compliant. That is the textbook definition of a false positive: Reality = non-compliant. System = says compliant.
-
Learner213 👍 4 Answered CI'm changing my answer to C. MDM is not installed, so the personal laptop should not be able to connect. A false negative is the only thing that makes sense.
-
Trini_007 👍 3 Answered CI change my answer to C. In the code, if the statement is not true, it goes to the else block. Because it's black and white, I couldn't see that 10 is red BUT I did research this output. If the statement is false, it will give you an else output.
-
Trini_007 👍 3 Answered BThe answer is B. The check only partially did the check. It allowed it through after just checking the OS version. It's supposed to the the OS Version and if the device has the MDM agent on it.
-
Learner213 👍 2 Answered BThe MDM is not running on the personal laptop. There is no indication of the version of Windows running on the laptop. Why would anyone assume the version is not 10 or 11? B is the correct answer.
Show 3 more comments
-
BenBenBen3 👍 2 Answered CThe flaw in the code indicated that is the OS version is less than 10, it will return as compliant, thus a false negative.
-
Rickhrd 👍 1 Answered BA security engineer is reviewing event logs because an employee successfully connected a personal Windows laptop to the corporate network, which is against company policy. < This I fear gives it away. It was ALLOWED. to connect. therefor it was compliant. and the only compliant answer would be. B.
-
arya_3365 👍 1 Answered CTo clarify confusion from old comments, if the OS was lower than Windows 10 AND the agent is running the logic of the code would return COMPLIANT. B is incorrect since even if the OS wasn't a valid version if there is an agent installed the code would still return COMPLIANT.
Reader comments & corrections
No reader corrections yet — spotted an error or have a note? Share it below.
Related Analysis
Practice All CAS-005 Questions
Access 135 questions with complete answers and detailed explanations.
View Full CAS-005 Practice Test →