exam questions

Exam AWS Certified Machine Learning - Specialty All Questions

View all questions & answers for the AWS Certified Machine Learning - Specialty exam

Exam AWS Certified Machine Learning - Specialty topic 1 question 237 discussion

A company's data engineer wants to use Amazon S3 to share datasets with data scientists. The data scientists work in three departments: Finance. Marketing, and Human Resources. Each department has its own IAM user group. Some datasets contain sensitive information and should be accessed only by the data scientists from the Finance department.

How can the data engineer set up access to meet these requirements?

  • A. Create an S3 bucket for each dataset. Create an ACL for each S3 bucket. For each S3 bucket that contains a sensitive dataset, set the ACL to allow access only from the Finance department user group. Allow all three department user groups to access each S3 bucket that contains a non-sensitive dataset.
  • B. Create an S3 bucket for each dataset. For each S3 bucket that contains a sensitive dataset, set the bucket policy to allow access only from the Finance department user group. Allow all three department user groups to access each S3 bucket that contains a non-sensitive dataset.
  • C. Create a single S3 bucket that includes two folders to separate the sensitive datasets from the non-sensitive datasets. For the Finance department user group, attach an IAM policy that provides access to both folders. For the Marketing and Human Resources department user groups, attach an IAM policy that provides access to only the folder that contains the non-sensitive datasets.
  • D. Create a single S3 bucket that includes two folders to separate the sensitive datasets from the non-sensitive datasets. Set the policy for the S3 bucket to allow only the Finance department user group to access the folder that contains the sensitive datasets. Allow all three department user groups to access the folder that contains the non-sensitive datasets.
Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: C 🗳️

Comments

Chosen Answer:
This is a voting comment (?). It is better to Upvote an existing comment if you don't have anything to add.
Switch to a voting comment New
CloudGyan
3 weeks ago
Selected Answer: D
The goal is to provide secure and efficient access to datasets stored in Amazon S3. Sensitive datasets should be accessible only to the Finance department, while non-sensitive datasets should be accessible to all user groups. S3 bucket policies are the most effective and scalable solution for implementing access control in this scenario.
upvoted 1 times
...
sheetalconect
7 months, 1 week ago
Selected Answer: D
For the Marketing and Human Resources department user groups, attach an IAM policy that provides access to only the folder that contains the non-sensitive datasets. Finance department user also need access to non-sensitive datasets.
upvoted 2 times
...
endeesa
1 year, 2 months ago
Selected Answer: C
I think attaching the policy is more flexible, in case this pattern needs to be repeated for another s3 bucket?
upvoted 1 times
...
geoan13
1 year, 2 months ago
Selected Answer: C
You cannot identify a user group as a principal in a policy (such as a resource-based policy) because groups relate to permissions, not authentication, and principals are authenticated IAM entities. an Amazon S3 bucket policy cannot have a user group as the principal directly. https://docs.aws.amazon.com/IAM/latest/UserGuide/reference_policies_elements_principal.html I stand corrected. I retract my previous answer.
upvoted 4 times
...
geoan13
1 year, 2 months ago
D Use a bucket policy. User group cannot be a principal in IAM policy. adding each individual user to the policy is not practical
upvoted 2 times
...
teka112233
1 year, 4 months ago
Selected Answer: C
According to the AWS documentation, you cannot specify an IAM group as a principal in an S3 bucket policy. This is because groups relate to permissions, not authentication, and principals are authenticated IAM entities. You can only specify the following principals in a policy: AWS account and root user IAM user Federated user IAM role . If you want to grant permission to an IAM group, you can add the ARNs of all the IAM users in that group to the S3 bucket policy instead. so it is C to create 2 IAM roles and attach them to different groups you have
upvoted 2 times
teka112233
1 year, 4 months ago
REF: https://docs.aws.amazon.com/AmazonS3/latest/userguide/s3-bucket-user-policy-specifying-principal-intro.html
upvoted 1 times
...
...
ashii007
1 year, 5 months ago
https://docs.aws.amazon.com/AmazonS3/latest/userguide/walkthrough1.html it does not show any option to use iam group based s3 bucket policy. (so D cannot be the right answer)
upvoted 2 times
...
Mickey321
1 year, 5 months ago
Selected Answer: C
changing to C
upvoted 2 times
...
Mickey321
1 year, 5 months ago
Selected Answer: D
Option D suggests creating a single S3 bucket that includes two folders to separate the sensitive datasets from the non-sensitive datasets. This option is helpful because it can simplify the data management and reduce the cost of using multiple S3 buckets. You can use a single S3 bucket to store all your datasets and use folders to organize them by their sensitivity level1. You can also use the Amazon S3 console or the AWS CLI to create and manage your folders2.
upvoted 1 times
...
jyrajan69
1 year, 6 months ago
First it is more efficient to use one single bucket, S3 has limit of 100 buckets by default, answer C creates two policies while for answer D , it is done with one, and use Deny on the sensitive folder to the two groups not finance, and have an allow to the non sensitive, knowing that deny takes precendence
upvoted 1 times
...
ADVIT
1 year, 7 months ago
Selected Answer: C
In S3 bucket Policy you CANNOT specify IAM Group as Principal, but you can specify IAM Users. So it's C.
upvoted 1 times
...
injoho
1 year, 9 months ago
Option C https://stackoverflow.com/questions/35944349/iam-aws-s3-to-restrict-to-a-specific-sub-folder https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/security/how-to-restrict-amazon-s3-bucket-access-to-a-specific-iam-role/
upvoted 2 times
...
staskrocket
1 year, 9 months ago
Selected Answer: C
I will choose C
upvoted 3 times
...
jackzhao
1 year, 10 months ago
I will choose C
upvoted 3 times
...
blanco750
1 year, 10 months ago
Both B and D look apparently correct but they are not because in s3 bucket policy , IAM Group cant be the principal. In other words you cant give access to a User group to s3 buckets using s3 bucket policy. It can only be an IAM user or role.https://stackoverflow.com/questions/30667678/s3-bucket-policy-how-to-allow-a-iam-group-from-another-account I would go for C
upvoted 4 times
...
blanco750
1 year, 10 months ago
Selected Answer: D
single bucket looks a better option. Ease of management and still secure
upvoted 1 times
blanco750
1 year, 10 months ago
Actually this is not possible. I will go for C
upvoted 3 times
RC2020
1 year, 7 months ago
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/30667678/s3-bucket-policy-how-to-allow-a-iam-group-from-another-account
upvoted 1 times
...
...
...
oso0348
1 year, 10 months ago
Selected Answer: D
Creating a single S3 bucket that includes two folders to separate the sensitive datasets from the non-sensitive datasets would be the best approach. The policy of the S3 bucket can be set to allow only the Finance department user group to access the folder that contains the sensitive datasets. The folder that contains non-sensitive datasets can be made available to all three department user groups. This approach will ensure that sensitive datasets are only accessible to users who need access to them.
upvoted 1 times
...
Community vote distribution
A (35%)
C (25%)
B (20%)
Other
Most Voted
A voting comment increases the vote count for the chosen answer by one.

Upvoting a comment with a selected answer will also increase the vote count towards that answer by one. So if you see a comment that you already agree with, you can upvote it instead of posting a new comment.

SaveCancel
Loading ...
exam
Someone Bought Contributor Access for:
SY0-701
London, 1 minute ago