Amazon Web Services DOP-C02 Practice Test Questions Answers

The most operationally efficient solution is to use AWS Systems Manager Parameter Store1 to store the AMI ID and reference it in the launch template2. This way, the launch template does not need to be updated every time a new AMI is created by Image Builder. Instead, the Image Builder pipeline can update the Parameter Store value with the newest AMI ID3, and the Auto Scaling group can launch instances using the latest value from Parameter Store.

The other solutions require updating the launch template or creating a new version of it every time a new AMI is created, which adds complexity and overhead. Additionally, using EventBridge rules and Lambda functions or Run Command documents introduces additional dependencies and potential points of failure.

 1: AWS Systems Manager Parameter Store 2: Using AWS Systems Manager parameters instead of AMI IDs in launch templates 3: Update an SSM parameter with Image Builder

Step 1: Reacting to CloudFormation Stack Events with EventBridgeAWS CloudFormation emits events during the lifecycle of a stack, including the UPDATE_COMPLETE event after a successful stack update. You can use Amazon EventBridge to detect this event and trigger a specific action (such as invoking a Lambda function).

Action: Create an EventBridge rule that listens for the UPDATE_COMPLETE event for the CloudFormation stack.

Why: EventBridge allows you to automatically detect CloudFormation stack lifecycle events and take action based on them.

Step 2: Invoking the Lambda FunctionAfter the EventBridge rule detects the UPDATE_COMPLETE event, it can invoke the pre-configured Lambda function to apply or update the tag on the specific CloudFormation stack instance.

Action: Configure the EventBridge rule to invoke the Lambda function when the UPDATE_COMPLETE event occurs.

Why: This automation ensures that the tag is applied immediately after a successful stack update without any manual intervention.

A comprehensive and detailed explanation is:

Option A is correct because removing the AdministratorAccess policy and assigning the ReadOnlyAccess managed IAM policy to the developer role is a valid way to prevent the developers from making any manual changes to the deployed resources. The AdministratorAccess policy grants full access to all AWS resources and actions, which is not necessary for the developers. The ReadOnlyAccess policy grants read-only access to most AWS resources and actions, which is sufficient for the developers to view the status of their stacks. Instructing the developers to use the CloudFormationDeployment role as a CloudFormation service role when they deploy new stacks is also a valid way to ensure that only CloudFormation can use the new role. A CloudFormation service role is an IAM role that allows CloudFormation to make calls to resources in a stack on behalf of the user1. The user can specify a service role when they create or update a stack, and CloudFormation will use that role’s credentials for all operations that are performed on that stack1.

Option B is incorrect because updating the trust of CloudFormationDeployment role to allow the developer IAM role to assume the CloudFormationDeployment role is not a valid solution. This would allow the developers to manually assume the CloudFormationDeployment role and perform actions on the deployed resources, which is not what the company wants. The trust of CloudFormationDeployment role should only allow the cloudformation.amazonaws.com AWS principal to assume the role, as in option D.

Option C is incorrect because configuring the IAM user to be able to get and pass the CloudFormationDeployment role if cloudformation actions for resources is not a valid solution. This would allow the developers to manually pass the CloudFormationDeployment role to other services or resources, which is not what the company wants. The IAM user should only be able to pass the CloudFormationDeployment role as a service role when they create or update a stack with CloudFormation, as in option A.

Option D is correct because updating the trust of CloudFormationDeployment role to allow the cloudformation.amazonaws.com AWS principal to perform the iam:AssumeRole action is a valid solution. This allows CloudFormation to assume the CloudFormationDeployment role and access resources in other services on behalf of the user2. The trust policy of an IAM role defines which entities can assume the role2. By specifying cloudformation.amazonaws.com as the principal, you grant permission only to CloudFormation to assume this role.

Option E is incorrect because instructing the developers to assume the CloudFormationDeployment role when they deploy new stacks is not a valid solution. This would allow the developers to manually assume the CloudFormationDeployment role and perform actions on the deployed resources, which is not what the company wants. The developers should only use the CloudFormationDeployment role as a service role when they deploy new stacks with CloudFormation, as in option A.

Option F is correct because adding an IAM policy to CloudFormationDeployment that allows cloudformation:* on all resources and adding a policy that allows the iam:PassRole action for ARN of CloudFormationDeployment if iam:PassedToService equals cloudformation.amazonaws.com are valid solutions. The first policy grants permission for CloudFormationDeployment to perform any action with any resource using cloudformation.amazonaws.com as a service principal3. The second policy grants permission for passing this role only if it is passed by cloudformation.amazonaws.com as a service principal4. This ensures that only CloudFormation can use this role.

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation From Exact Extract:

To add an automated test in AWS CodePipeline that checks the HTTP response code of a deployed application, the most straightforward and operationally efficient method is to create an AWS Lambda function that makes an HTTP request to the application URL, checks the response code, and then reports success or failure back to CodePipeline.

The Lambda function can be invoked as an action in the pipeline stage.

If the response code is not 200 OK, the Lambda function can return a failure, causing the pipeline stage to fail and halt further execution.

Option A’s CloudWatch synthetic canary monitors are useful for ongoing monitoring but are not natively integrated as CodePipeline actions to control pipeline flow.

Option C incorrectly uses CodeDeploy action for testing, which is not designed for this purpose.

Option D introduces unnecessary complexity by deploying API Gateway and Device Farm, which is not required for a simple HTTP status check.Therefore, option B provides a clean, simple, and fully automated way to enforce HTTP response validation within the pipeline.

Reference from AWS Official Documentation:

AWS CodePipeline Custom Actions:"You can create Lambda invoke actions in your pipeline stages to run custom validation or testing functions."(AWS CodePipeline User Guide - Lambda Actions)

AWS Lambda Function for Health Checks:"Lambda functions can be used to perform health checks or API response validations and report results back to invoking services."(AWS Lambda Developer Guide)