SAA-C03 Exam Dumps - Amazon Web Services AWS Certified Associate Questions and Answers

Requirement Analysis: The goal is to migrate from Microsoft SQL Server to Amazon Aurora PostgreSQL with minimal application code changes.

Babelfish for Aurora PostgreSQL: Babelfish allows Aurora PostgreSQL to understand SQL Server queries natively, reducing the need for application code changes.

AWS Schema Conversion Tool (SCT): This tool helps in converting the database schema from SQL Server to PostgreSQL.

AWS Database Migration Service (DMS): DMS can be used to migrate data from SQL Server to Aurora PostgreSQL seamlessly.

Combined Approach: Enabling Babelfish addresses the SQL query compatibility, while SCT and DMS handle the schema and data migration.

References

Babelfish for Aurora PostgreSQL:Babelfish Documentation

AWS SCT and DMS:AWS Database Migration Service

Understanding the Requirement: The company wants to migrate an application to AWS, increase its availability, and use AWS WAF in the architecture.

Analysis of Options:

Auto Scaling group with ALB and WAF: This option provides high availability by distributing instances across multiple Availability Zones. The ALB ensures even traffic distribution, and AWS WAF provides security at the application layer.

Cluster placement group with ALB and WAF: Cluster placement groups are for low-latency networking within a single AZ, which does not provide the high availability across AZs.

Two EC2 instances with ALB and WAF: This setup provides some availability but does not scale automatically, missing the benefits of an Auto Scaling group.

Auto Scaling group with WAF directly: AWS WAF cannot be directly connected to an Auto Scaling group; it needs to be attached to an ALB, CloudFront distribution, or API Gateway.

Best Solution:

Auto Scaling group with ALB and WAF: This configuration ensures high availability, scalability, and security, meeting all the requirements effectively.

Security groups are stateful. All inbound traffic is blocked by default. If you create an inbound rule allowing traffic in, that traffic is automatically allowed back out again. You cannot block specific IP address using Security groups (instead use Network Access Control Lists).

"You can specify allow rules, but not deny rules." "When you first create a security group, it has no inbound rules. Therefore, no inbound traffic originating from another host to your instance is allowed until you add inbound rules to the security group." Source:https://docs.aws.amazon.com/vpc/latest/userguide/VPC_SecurityGroups.html#VPCSecurityGroups

Understanding the Requirement: The company needs to ensure clients use a TLS certificate when accessing the website and automate the creation and renewal of TLS certificates.

Analysis of Options:

CloudFront Security Policy: Not applicable for creating certificates.

CloudFront Origin Access Control (OAC): Controls access to origins, not relevant for TLS certificate creation.

AWS Certificate Manager (ACM) with DNS Validation: Provides automated certificate management, including creation and renewal, with minimal manual intervention. DNS validation is automated and does not require manual intervention as email validation does.

AWS Certificate Manager (ACM) with Email Validation: Requires manual intervention to approve validation emails, which increases operational effort.

Best Solution:

AWS Certificate Manager (ACM) with DNS Validation: Ensures automated and efficient certificate management with the least operational effort.

Understanding the Requirement: The company needs to migrate sensitive and critical data from on-premises SQL Server databases to AWS, aiming to increase security and reduce operational overhead.

Analysis of Options:

EC2 Instances with KMS: Running SQL Server on EC2 provides control but requires significant operational overhead for management, backups, patching, and high availability.

Multi-AZ Amazon RDS for SQL Server with KMS: Amazon RDS for SQL Server offers managed database services, reducing operational overhead. Multi-AZ deployment provides high availability, and KMS encryption ensures data security.

Amazon S3 and Macie: S3 is not a suitable replacement for relational databases, and Macie is used for data security and compliance but not for database operations.

Amazon DynamoDB and CloudWatch Logs: DynamoDB is a NoSQL database and does not support SQL Server workloads directly. CloudWatch Logs are used for monitoring, not for ensuring database security.

Best Solution:

Multi-AZ Amazon RDS for SQL Server with KMS: This solution meets the requirements for security, high availability, and reduced operational overhead by using a managed database service with encryption.

https://docs.aws.amazon.com/AWSEC2/latest/WindowsGuide/monitor-ami-events.html#:~:text=For%20example%2C%20you%20can%20create%20an%20EventBridge%20rule%20that%20detects%20when%20the%20AMI%20creation%20process%20has%20completed%20and%20then%20invokes%20an%20Amazon%20SNS%20topic%20to%20send%20an%20email%20notification%20to%20you.

Creating an Amazon EventBridge (Amazon CloudWatch Events) rule for the CreateImage API call and configuring the target as an Amazon Simple Notification Service (Amazon SNS) topic to send an alert when a CreateImage API call is detected will meet the requirements with the least operational overhead. Amazon EventBridge is a serverless event bus that makes it easy to connect applications together using data from your own applications, integrated Software as a Service (SaaS) applications, and AWS services. By creating an EventBridge rule for the CreateImage API call, the company can set up alerts whenever this operation is called within their account. The alert can be sent to an SNS topic, which can then be configured to send notifications to the company's email or other desired destination.

https://aws.amazon.com/about-aws/whats-new/2017/10/aws-waf-now-supports-geographic-match/

Understanding the Requirement: The company needs programmatic access to its AWS usage costs for the current year and cost forecasts for the next 12 months, with minimal operational overhead.

Analysis of Options:

AWS Cost Explorer API: Provides programmatic access to detailed usage and cost data, including forecast costs. It supports pagination for handling large datasets, making it an efficient solution.

Downloadable AWS Cost Explorer report csv files: While useful, this method requires manual handling of files and does not provide real-time access.

AWS Budgets actions via FTP: This is less suitable as it involves setting up FTP transfers and does not provide the same level of detail and real-time access as the API.

AWS Budgets reports via SMTP: Similar to FTP, this method involves additional setup and lacks the real-time access and detail provided by the API.

Best Option for Minimal Operational Overhead:

AWS Cost Explorer API provides direct, programmatic access to cost data, including detailed usage and forecasting, with minimal setup and operational effort. It is the most efficient solution for integrating cost data into an operational cost dashboard.

To securely integrate Amazon S3 with an application that uses Amazon Cognito for user authentication, the following two steps are essential:

Step 1: Create an Amazon Cognito Identity Pool (Option A)

Amazon Cognito Identity Poolsallow users to obtain temporary AWS credentials to access AWS resources, such as Amazon S3, after successfully authenticating with the Cognito user pool. The identity pool bridges the gap between user authentication and AWS service access by generating temporary credentials using AWS Identity and Access Management (IAM).

Once a user logs in using theCognito User Pool, the identity pool providesIAM roles with specific permissionsthat the application can use to access S3 securely. This ensures that each user has appropriate access controls while accessing the S3 bucket.

This is a secure way to ensure that users only have temporary and least-privilege access to the S3 bucket for their documents.

Step 2: Create an Amazon S3 VPC Endpoint (Option C)

By creating anAmazon S3 VPC endpoint, the company ensures that communication between the application (which is hosted in a private subnet) and the S3 bucket occurs over theAWS private network, without the need to traverse the internet. This enhances security and prevents exposure of data to public networks.

TheVPC endpointallows the application to access the S3 bucket privately and securely within the VPC. It also ensures that traffic stays within the AWS network, reducing attack surface and improving overall security.

Why the Other Options Are Incorrect:

Option B: This is incorrect becauseAmazon Cognito User Poolsare used for user authentication, not for generating S3 access tokens. To provide S3 access, you need to useAmazon Cognito Identity Pools, which offer AWS credentials.

Option D: ANAT gatewayis unnecessary in this scenario. Using aVPC endpointfor S3 access provides a more secure and cost-effective solution by keeping traffic within AWS.

Option E: Attaching a policy to restrict access based on IP addresses is not scalable or efficient. It would require managing users’ dynamic IP addresses, which is not an effective security measure for this use case.

AWS References:

Amazon Cognito Identity Pools

Amazon VPC Endpoints for S3

Understanding the Requirement: Senior leadership wants a custom dashboard displaying NAT gateway costs daily, starting from the beginning of the current month.

Analysis of Options:

QuickSight with DataSync: While QuickSight is suitable for dashboards, DataSync is not designed for querying and analyzing data reports.

QuickSight with Athena: QuickSight can visualize data queried by Athena, which is designed to analyze data directly from S3.

CloudWatch with DataSync: CloudWatch is primarily for monitoring metrics, not for creating detailed cost analysis dashboards.

CloudWatch with Athena: Similarly, using CloudWatch with Athena does not align well with the requirement for a visual dashboard.

Best Solution for Visualization and Querying:

Amazon QuickSight with Athena: This combination allows for powerful data visualization and querying capabilities. QuickSight can create dynamic dashboards, while Athena efficiently queries the cost and usage report data stored in S3.

Understanding the Requirements: The company needs to optimize costs and has the flexibility to change EC2 instance types and families frequently (every 2-3 months).

Savings Plans Overview: Savings Plans offer significant savings over On-Demand pricing, with the flexibility to use any instance type and family within a region.

No Upfront Compute Savings Plan: This plan allows for cost optimization without any upfront payment, offering flexibility to change instance types and families.

Term Selection: A 1-year term is appropriate for balancing cost savings and flexibility given the frequent changes in instance types.

Conclusion: A No Upfront Compute Savings Plan for a 1-year term provides the needed flexibility and cost savings without the commitment and inflexibility of Reserved Instances.

References

AWS Savings Plans:AWS Savings Plans

AWS Cost Management Documentation:AWS Cost Management

https://aws.amazon.com/cn/blogs/compute/cost-optimization-and-resilience-eks-with-spot-instances/

Understanding the Requirement: The company needs to map its IT infrastructure to identify and enforce security policies, with the ability to quickly query and identify security risks.

Analysis of Options:

Amazon RDS: While suitable for relational data, it is not optimized for handling complex relationships and querying those relationships, which is essential for an IT infrastructure map.

Amazon Neptune: A graph database service designed for handling highly connected data. It uses SPARQL to query graph data efficiently, making it ideal for mapping IT infrastructure and identifying relationships that pose security risks.

Amazon Redshift: A data warehouse solution optimized for complex queries on large datasets but not specifically for graph data.

Amazon DynamoDB: A NoSQL database that uses PartiQL for querying, but it is not optimized for complex relationships in graph data.

Best Option for Mapping and Querying IT Infrastructure:

Amazon Neptune provides the most suitable solution with the least operational overhead. It is purpose-built for graph data and enables efficient querying of complex relationships to identify security risks.

Requirement Analysis: The application was overwhelmed with unexpected data volume, leading to data loss and the need for a replay mechanism.

Amazon SQS Overview: SQS is a fully managed message queuing service that decouples and scales microservices, distributed systems, and serverless applications.

Data Decoupling: By using an SQS queue, the application can store incoming tracker data reliably and process it asynchronously, preventing data loss.

Implementation:

Create an SQS queue.

Modify the web application to send incoming data to the SQS queue.

Configure the application instances to poll the SQS queue and process the messages.

Conclusion: This solution meets the requirements with minimal operational overhead, ensuring data is not lost and can be processed at the application’s own pace.

References

Amazon SQS:Amazon SQS Documentation

Requirement Analysis: The application needs near real-time access to data, persistence, and minimal operational overhead.

ElastiCache for Redis: Provides in-memory data storage with persistence, supporting fast access and durability.

Operational Overhead: Managed service reduces the burden of setup, maintenance, and scaling.

Implementation:

Deploy an ElastiCache for Redis cluster.

Configure Redis to persist data to disk using AOF (Append-Only File) or RDB (Redis Database Backup) snapshots.

Conclusion: ElastiCache for Redis meets the requirements for fast access, data persistence, and low operational overhead.

References

Amazon ElastiCache:ElastiCache for Redis Documentation

Understanding the Requirement: The company needs to copy files generated by an on-premises application to AWS without modifying the application code. The files are stored on an SMB file share and require a low-latency connection to the application servers.

Analysis of Options:

Amazon Elastic File System (EFS): EFS is designed for Linux-based workloads and does not natively support SMB file shares.

Amazon FSx for Windows File Server: FSx supports SMB file shares but would require changes to the application or additional infrastructure to connect on-premises systems.

AWS Snowball: Suitable for large data transfers but not for continuous, low-latency file copying.

AWS Storage Gateway: Provides a hybrid cloud storage solution, supporting SMB file shares and enabling seamless copying of files to AWS without requiring changes to the application.

Best Solution:

AWS Storage Gateway: This service meets the requirement for a low-latency, seamless file transfer solution from on-premises to AWS without modifying the application code.

Understanding the Requirement: The company needs all EC2 instances to share up-to-date website content with minimal lag time, running behind an Application Load Balancer.

Analysis of Options:

EC2 User Data with ALB: Complex and not scalable as it requires updating each instance manually.

Amazon EFS: Provides a scalable, shared file storage solution that can be mounted by multiple EC2 instances, ensuring all instances have access to the same up-to-date content.

Amazon S3 with EC2 Sync: Involves periodic synchronization which introduces lag and complexity.

Amazon EBS Snapshots: Not suitable for dynamic and frequent updates required by a content management system.

Best Solution:

Amazon EFS: Ensures all EC2 instances have access to a consistent and up-to-date set of website assets with minimal lag time, meeting the requirements effectively.

Understanding the Requirement: The application running in a private subnet needs to store and retrieve data from S3 without data traveling over the public internet.

Analysis of Options:

NAT Gateway: Allows private subnets to access the internet but incurs additional costs and still routes traffic through the public internet.

AWS Storage Gateway: Provides hybrid cloud storage solutions but is not the most cost-effective for direct S3 access from within the VPC.

S3 Interface Endpoint: Provides private access to S3 but is generally used for specific use cases where more granular control is required, which might be overkill and more expensive.

S3 Gateway Endpoint: Provides private, cost-effective access to S3 from within the VPC without routing traffic through the public internet.

Best Solution:

S3 Gateway Endpoint: This option meets the requirements for secure, private access to S3 from a private subnet most cost-effectively.

Requirement Analysis: The application must process each credit card data validation request at least once, securely and cost-effectively.

SQS FIFO Queues: Ensures that each message is processed exactly once and in the exact order sent.

AWS Lambda: Using Lambda for event-driven processing ensures scalability and cost-efficiency.

SSE-SQS: Provides encryption at rest using SQS-managed keys, simplifying encryption management.

Implementation:

Set up SQS FIFO queues as the event source for Lambda.

Enable SSE-SQS for encryption.

Ensure the Lambda execution role has the necessary permissions to use the encryption keys.

Conclusion: This combination meets the requirements of security, exact-once processing, and cost-effectiveness.

References

Amazon SQS:Amazon SQS Documentation

AWS Lambda with SQS:Using AWS Lambda with Amazon SQS

Understanding the Requirement: The company wants to cost-optimize their workload that uses EC2, Lambda, Fargate, and SageMaker, covering the most services with the fewest savings plans.

Analysis of Options:

EC2 Instance Savings Plan: Limited to EC2 and SageMaker, missing coverage for Lambda and Fargate.

Compute Savings Plan: Provides the most flexibility, covering a broad range of compute services, including EC2, Lambda, Fargate, and SageMaker.

SageMaker Savings Plan: Specifically for SageMaker, missing coverage for EC2, Lambda, and Fargate.

Combination of plans: The Compute Savings Plan is versatile and can be combined to cover different services efficiently.

Best Solution:

Compute Savings Plan for EC2, Lambda, and SageMaker: Covers the primary compute services efficiently.

Compute Savings Plan for Lambda, Fargate, and EC2: Covers the remaining services, ensuring broad coverage with minimal plans.