Amazon SCS-C02 Practice Test - Questions Answers, Page 28

The combination of the following actions should the Engineer take to enable users to be authenticated into the web application and call APIs are:

B) Configure a SAML identity provider in Amazon Cognito to map attributes to the Amazon Cognito user pool attributes. This is a necessary step to federate the existing users from the SAML identity provider to the Amazon Cognito user pool, which will be used for authentication and authorization1.

C) Configure the SAML identity provider to add the Amazon Cognito user pool as a relying party. This is a necessary step to establish a trust relationship between the SAML identity provider and the Amazon Cognito user pool, which will allow the users to sign in using their existing credentials2.

F) Update API Gateway to use a COGNITO_USER_POOLS authorizer. This is a necessary step to enable API Gateway to use the Amazon Cognito user pool as an authorizer for the RESTful services, which will validate the identity or access tokens that are issued by Amazon Cognito when a user signs in successfully3.

The other options are incorrect because:

A) Creating a custom authorization service using AWS Lambda is not a necessary step, because Amazon Cognito user pools can provide built-in authorization features, such as scopes and groups, that can be used to control access to API resources4.

D) Configuring an Amazon Cognito identity pool to integrate with social login providers is not a necessary step, because the users already exist in a directory that is exposed through a SAML identity provider, and there is no requirement to support social login providers5.

E) Updating DynamoDB to store the user email addresses and passwords is not a necessary step, because the user credentials are already stored in the SAML identity provider, and there is no need to duplicate them in DynamoDB6.

1: Using Tokens with User Pools 2: Adding SAML Identity Providers to a User Pool 3: Control Access to a REST API Using Amazon Cognito User Pools as Authorizer 4: API Authorization with Resource Servers and OAuth 2.0 Scopes 5: Using Identity Pools (Federated Identities) 6: Amazon DynamoDB

The combination of solutions that will meet the requirements are:

A) Create a local individual break glass IAM user for the security team. Create a trail in AWS CloudTrail that has Amazon CloudWatch Logs turned on. Use Amazon EventBridge to monitor local user activities. This is a valid solution because it allows the security team to access the workload AWS account and instances using a local IAM user that does not depend on SAML federation. It also enables logging and monitoring of the break glass user activities using AWS CloudTrail, Amazon CloudWatch Logs, and Amazon EventBridge123.

E) Configure AWS Systems Manager Session Manager for Amazon EC2. Configure an AWS CloudTrail filter based on Session Manager. Send the results to an Amazon Simple Notification Service (Amazon SNS) topic. This is a valid solution because it allows the security team to access the workload instances without opening any inbound ports or managing SSH keys or bastion hosts. It also enables logging and notification of the break glass user activities using AWS CloudTrail, Session Manager, and Amazon SNS456.

The other options are incorrect because:

B) Creating a break glass EC2 key pair for the AWS account and providing it to the security team is not a valid solution, because it requires opening inbound ports on the instances and managing SSH keys, which increases the security risk and complexity7.

C) Creating a break glass IAM role for the account and allowing security team members to perform the AssumeRoleWithSAML operation is not a valid solution, because it still depends on SAML federation, which might not work in case of SAML errors8.

D) Creating a local individual break glass IAM user on the operating system level of each workload instance and configuring unrestricted security groups on the instances to grant access to the break glass IAM users is not a valid solution, because it requires opening inbound ports on the instances and managing multiple local users, which increases the security risk and complexity9.

1: Creating an IAM User in Your AWS Account 2: Creating a Trail - AWS CloudTrail 3: Using Amazon EventBridge with AWS CloudTrail 4: Setting up Session Manager - AWS Systems Manager 5: Logging Session Manager sessions - AWS Systems Manager 6: Amazon Simple Notification Service 7: Connecting to your Linux instance using SSH - Amazon Elastic Compute Cloud 8: AssumeRoleWithSAML - AWS Security Token Service 9: IAM Users - AWS Identity and Access Management

The correct answer is C. Create rule sets in AWS CloudFormation Guard. Run validation checks for CloudFormation templates as a phase of the CI/CD process.

This answer is correct because AWS CloudFormation Guard is a tool that helps you implement policy-as-code for your CloudFormation templates. You can use Guard to write rules that define your security policies, such as requiring encryption for EBS volumes, and then validate your templates against those rules before deploying them. You can integrate Guard into your CI/CD pipeline as a step that runs the validation checks and prevents the deployment of any non-compliant templates12.

The other options are incorrect because:

A) Turning on AWS Trusted Advisor and configuring security notifications as webhooks in the preferences section of the CI/CD pipeline is not a solution, because AWS Trusted Advisor is not a policy-as-code tool, but a service that provides recommendations to help you follow AWS best practices. Trusted Advisor does not allow you to define your own security policies or validate your CloudFormation templates against them3.

B) Turning on AWS Config and using the prebuilt or customized rules is not a solution, because AWS Config is not a policy-as-code tool, but a service that monitors and records the configuration changes of your AWS resources. AWS Config does not allow you to validate your CloudFormation templates before deploying them, but only evaluates the compliance of your resources after they are created4.

D) Creating rule sets as SCPs and integrating them as a part of validation control in a phase of the CI/CD process is not a solution, because SCPs are not policy-as-code tools, but policies that you can use to manage permissions in your AWS Organizations. SCPs do not allow you to validate your CloudFormation templates, but only restrict the actions that users and roles can perform in your accounts5.

1: What is AWS CloudFormation Guard? 2: Introducing AWS CloudFormation Guard 2.0 3: AWS Trusted Advisor 4: What Is AWS Config? 5: Service control policies - AWS Organizations

https://docs.aws.amazon.com/AWSEC2/latest/UserGuide/using-eni.html#eni-basics Source/destination checking 'You must disable source/destination checks if the instance runs services such as network address translation, routing, or firewalls.'

The correct answer is C) Disable the Network Source/Destination check on the security appliance's elastic network interface.

This answer is correct because disabling the Network Source/Destination check allows the virtual security appliance to route traffic that is not addressed to or from itself. By default, this check is enabled on all EC2 instances, and it prevents them from forwarding traffic that does not match their own IP or MAC addresses. However, for a virtual security appliance that acts as a router or a firewall, this check needs to be disabled, otherwise it will drop the traffic that it is supposed to route12.

The other options are incorrect because:

A) Disabling network ACLs is not a solution, because network ACLs are optional layers of security for the subnets in a VPC. They can be used to allow or deny traffic based on IP addresses and ports, but they do not affect the routing behavior of the virtual security appliance3.

B) Configuring the security appliance's elastic network interface for promiscuous mode is not a solution, because promiscuous mode is a mode for a network interface that causes it to pass all traffic it receives to the CPU, rather than passing only the frames that it is programmed to receive. Promiscuous mode is normally used for packet sniffing or monitoring, but it does not enable the network interface to route traffic4.

D) Placing the security appliance in the public subnet with the internet gateway is not a solution, because it does not address the routing issue of the virtual security appliance. The security appliance can be placed in either a public or a private subnet, depending on the network design and security requirements, but it still needs to have the Network Source/Destination check disabled to route traffic properly5.

1: Enabling or disabling source/destination checks - Amazon Elastic Compute Cloud 2: Virtual security appliance - Wikipedia 3: Network ACLs - Amazon Virtual Private Cloud 4: Promiscuous mode - Wikipedia 5: NAT instances - Amazon Virtual Private Cloud

The following may be causing the problem for the Auditor:

A) The external ID used by the Auditor is missing or incorrect. This is a possible cause, because the external ID is a unique identifier that is used to establish a trust relationship between the accounts. The external ID must match the one that is specified in the role's trust policy in the destination account1.

C) The Auditor has not been granted sts:AssumeRole for the role in the destination account. This is a possible cause, because sts:AssumeRole is the API action that allows the Auditor to assume the cross-account role and obtain temporary credentials. The Auditor must have an IAM policy that allows them to call sts:AssumeRole for the role ARN in the destination account2.

F) The role ARN used by the Auditor is missing or incorrect. This is a possible cause, because the role ARN is the Amazon Resource Name of the cross-account role that the Auditor wants to assume. The role ARN must be valid and exist in the destination account3.

The correct answer is B. Modify the network ACL that is associated with the CIDR range to allow outbound traffic to ephemeral ports.

This answer is correct because network ACLs are stateless, which means that they do not automatically allow return traffic for inbound connections. Therefore, the network ACL that is associated with the CIDR range of the new application must have outbound rules that allow traffic to ephemeral ports, which are the temporary ports used by the vendors' machines to communicate with the application servers. Ephemeral ports are typically in the range of 1024-655351. If the network ACL does not have such rules, the vendors will not be able to connect to the application.

The other options are incorrect because:

A) Modifying the security group that is associated with the EC2 instances to have the same outbound rules as inbound rules is not a solution, because security groups are stateful, which means that they automatically allow return traffic for inbound connections. Therefore, there is no need to add outbound rules to the security group for the vendors to access the application2.

C) Modifying the inbound rules on the internet gateway to allow the required ports is not a solution, because internet gateways do not have inbound or outbound rules. Internet gateways are VPC components that enable communication between instances in a VPC and the internet. They do not filter traffic based on ports or protocols3.

D) Modifying the network ACL that is associated with the CIDR range to have the same outbound rules as inbound rules is not a solution, because it does not address the issue of ephemeral ports. The outbound rules of the network ACL must match the ephemeral port range of the vendors' machines, not necessarily the inbound rules of the network ACL4.

1: Ephemeral port - Wikipedia 2: Security groups for your VPC - Amazon Virtual Private Cloud 3: Internet gateways - Amazon Virtual Private Cloud 4: Network ACLs - Amazon Virtual Private Cloud

The correct answer is B. Configure CloudTrail to send events to Amazon CloudWatch Logs. Create a metric filter for the relevant log group. Create a filter pattern with eventName matching ConsoleLogin and errorMessage matching ''Failed authentication''. Create a CloudWatch alarm with a threshold of 3 and a period of 5 minutes.

This answer is correct because it meets the requirements of sending an alert when three or more failed sign-in attempts to the AWS Management Console occur during a 5-minute period. By configuring CloudTrail to send events to CloudWatch Logs, the security engineer can create a metric filter that matches the desired pattern of failed sign-in events. Then, by creating a CloudWatch alarm based on the metric filter, the security engineer can set a threshold of 3 and a period of 5 minutes, and choose an action such as sending an email or an Amazon Simple Notification Service (Amazon SNS) message when the alarm is triggered12.

The other options are incorrect because:

A) Turning on Insights events on the trail and configuring an alarm on the insight is not a solution, because Insights events are used to analyze unusual activity in management events, such as spikes in API call volume or error rates. Insights events do not capture failed sign-in attempts to the AWS Management Console3.

C) Creating an Amazon Athena table from the CloudTrail events and running a query for failed sign-in events is not a solution, because it does not provide a mechanism to send an alert based on the query results. Amazon Athena is an interactive query service that allows analyzing data in Amazon S3 using standard SQL, but it does not support creating notifications or alarms from queries4.

D) Creating an analyzer in AWS Identity and Access Management Access Analyzer and configuring it to send an Amazon SNS notification when a failed sign-in event occurs 3 times for any IAM user within a period of 5 minutes is not a solution, because IAM Access Analyzer is not a service that monitors sign-in events, but a service that helps identify resources that are shared with external entities. IAM Access Analyzer does not generate findings for failed sign-in attempts to the AWS Management Console5.

1: Sending CloudTrail Events to CloudWatch Logs - AWS CloudTrail 2: Creating Alarms Based on Metric Filters - Amazon CloudWatch 3: Analyzing unusual activity in management events - AWS CloudTrail 4: What is Amazon Athena? - Amazon Athena 5: Using AWS Identity and Access Management Access Analyzer - AWS Identity and Access Management

The possible reason that the IAM user cannot access the objects in the S3 bucket is D. The KMS key policy has been edited to remove the ability for the AWS account to have full access to the key.

This answer is correct because the KMS key policy is the primary way to control access to the KMS key, and it must explicitly allow the AWS account to have full access to the key. If the KMS key policy has been edited to remove this permission, then the IAM policy that grants kms:Decrypt permission to the IAM user has no effect, and the IAM user cannot decrypt the objects in the S3 bucket12.

The other options are incorrect because:

A) The IAM policy does not need to allow the kms:DescribeKey permission, because this permission is not required for decrypting objects in S3 using SSE-KMS. The kms:DescribeKey permission allows getting information about a KMS key, such as its creation date, description, and key state3.

B) The S3 bucket has not been changed to use the AWS managed key to encrypt objects at rest, because this would not cause an Access Denied message for the IAM user. The AWS managed key is a default KMS key that is created and managed by AWS for each AWS account and Region. The IAM user does not need any permissions on this key to use it for SSE-KMS4.

C) An S3 bucket policy does not need to be added to allow the IAM user to access the objects, because the IAM user already has s3:List* and s3:Get* permissions for the S3 bucket and its objects through an IAM policy. An S3 bucket policy is an optional way to grant cross-account access or public access to an S3 bucket5.

1: Key policies in AWS KMS 2: Using server-side encryption with AWS KMS keys (SSE-KMS) 3: AWS KMS API Permissions Reference 4: Using server-side encryption with Amazon S3 managed keys (SSE-S3) 5: Bucket policy examples

AWS Secrets Manager is a service that helps you manage, retrieve, and rotate secrets such as database credentials, API keys, and other sensitive information. By configuring automatic rotation of credentials in AWS Secrets Manager, you can ensure that your secrets are changed regularly and securely, without requiring manual intervention or application downtime.You can also specify the rotation frequency and the rotation function that performs the logic of changing the credentials on the database and updating the secret in Secrets Manager1.

E) Configure the Java application to catch a connection failure and make a call to AWS Secrets Manager to retrieve updated credentials when the password is rotated. Grant permission to the instance role associated with the EC2 instance to access Secrets Manager.

By configuring the Java application to catch a connection failure and make a call to AWS Secrets Manager to retrieve updated credentials, you can avoid hard-coding the credentials in your application code or configuration files. This way, your application can dynamically obtain the latest credentials from Secrets Manager whenever the password is rotated, without needing to restart or redeploy the application.To enable this, you need to grant permission to the instance role associated with the EC2 instance to access Secrets Manager using IAM policies2.You can also use the AWS SDK for Java to integrate your application with Secrets Manager3.