Q: 11
A company has a large fleet of Amazon Linux 2 Amazon EC2 instances that run an application
processing sensitive dat
a. Compliance requirements include no exposed management ports, full session logging, and
authentication through AWS IAM Identity Center. DevOps engineers occasionally need access for
troubleshooting.
Which solution will provide remote access while meeting these requirements?
Options
Discussion
Its C. Session Manager is designed for secure, compliant remote access without opening management ports. D is a trap since you should never open ports just for troubleshooting in sensitive environments. IAM Identity Center works smoothly with SSM roles too. Seen similar Qs in practice tests.
This AWS stuff gets so convoluted sometimes. B
Be respectful. No spam.
Q: 12
A company is using AWS Organizations with nested OUs to manage AWS accounts. The company has
a custom compliance monitoring service for the accounts. The monitoring service runs as an AWS
Lambda function and is invoked by Amazon EventBridge Scheduler.
The company needs to deploy the monitoring service in all existing and future accounts in the
organization. The company must avoid using the organization's management account when the
management account is not required.
Which solution will meet these requirements?
Options
Discussion
Probably B since it avoids using the management account and handles auto deployment to all current and future accounts. A is too manual, C/D don't guarantee org-wide auto rollout. Pretty sure this is what AWS recommends.
C/D? I'm honestly a bit confused here since both mention Systems Manager, but B seems like the better fit because it talks about delegated admin and targets org root with auto deployment. I think B meets the auto-deploy requirement, but would love a sanity check from someone who's done this.
Be respectful. No spam.
Q: 13
A company has AWS accounts in an organization in AWS Organizations. An Amazon S3 bucket in one
account is publicly accessible. A security engineer must remove public access and ensure the bucket
cannot be made public again.
Which solution will meet these requirements?
Options
Discussion
Option B looks right to me. If you enable PublicAccessBlock and then deny s3:GetObject at the org level with an SCP, that should stop public reads, and Block Public Access covers other risks. Had something like this in a mock and B was the answer there. Maybe I'm missing something?
C vs B, but C is better protection. PublicAccessBlock needs to stay enforced, so denying s3:PutPublicAccessBlock in the SCP keeps it locked down. B only blocks current access but admins could disable the block later. Pretty sure C is the intent here.
Be respectful. No spam.
Q: 14
A company needs to scan all AWS Lambda functions for code vulnerabilities.
Options
Discussion
B tbh. Saw a similar question in some exam reports and Inspector Lambda scanning is made for this use case.
Be respectful. No spam.
Q: 15
A company has security requirements for Amazon Aurora MySQL databases regarding encryption,
deletion protection, public access, and audit logging. The company needs continuous monitoring and
real-time visibility into compliance status.
Which solution will meet these requirements?
Options
Discussion
Feels like it's B since AWS Config managed rules can track encryption, deletion protection, public access, and logging for Aurora. This gives the ongoing compliance view they want. Anyone see a reason to use A or C here?
Be respectful. No spam.
Question 11 of 20 · Page 2 / 2