試験SCS-C03 トピック4 問題119 スレッド
Amazon SCS-C03のリアル試験問題集
問題 #: 119
トピック #: 4
問題 #: 119
トピック #: 4
A company's developers are using AWS Lambda function URLs to invoke functions directly. The company must ensure that developers cannot configure or deploy unauthenticated functions in production accounts. The company wants to meet this requirement by using AWS Organizations.
The solution must not require additional work for the developers. Which solution will meet these requirements?
The solution must not require additional work for the developers. Which solution will meet these requirements?
おすすめの解答:D 解答を投票する
AWS Organizations service control policies (SCPs) are designed to enforce preventive guardrails across accounts without requiring application-level changes. According to the AWS Certified Security - Specialty documentation, SCPs can restrict specific API actions or require certain condition keys to enforce security standards centrally. AWS Lambda function URLs support two authentication modes: AWS_IAM and NONE. When the authentication type is set to NONE, the function URL becomes publicly accessible, which introduces a significant security risk in production environments.
By using an SCP that explicitly denies the lambda:CreateFunctionUrlConfig and lambda:UpdateFunctionUrlConfig actions when the lambda:FunctionUrlAuthType condition key equals NONE, the organization ensures that unauthenticated function URLs cannot be created or modified in production accounts. This enforcement occurs at the AWS Organizations level and applies automatically to all accounts within the specified organizational units (OUs). Developers are not required to change their workflows or add additional controls, satisfying the requirement of no additional developer effort.
Option A relates to browser-based access controls and does not provide authentication or authorization enforcement. Option B is not valid because AWS WAF cannot be attached directly to AWS Lambda function URLs. Option C is incorrect because SCPs do not grant permissions; they only limit permissions. AWS documentation clearly states that SCPs define maximum available permissions and are evaluated before IAM policies.
This approach aligns with AWS best practices for centralized governance, least privilege, and preventive security controls.
By using an SCP that explicitly denies the lambda:CreateFunctionUrlConfig and lambda:UpdateFunctionUrlConfig actions when the lambda:FunctionUrlAuthType condition key equals NONE, the organization ensures that unauthenticated function URLs cannot be created or modified in production accounts. This enforcement occurs at the AWS Organizations level and applies automatically to all accounts within the specified organizational units (OUs). Developers are not required to change their workflows or add additional controls, satisfying the requirement of no additional developer effort.
Option A relates to browser-based access controls and does not provide authentication or authorization enforcement. Option B is not valid because AWS WAF cannot be attached directly to AWS Lambda function URLs. Option C is incorrect because SCPs do not grant permissions; they only limit permissions. AWS documentation clearly states that SCPs define maximum available permissions and are evaluated before IAM policies.
This approach aligns with AWS best practices for centralized governance, least privilege, and preventive security controls.
Suzuki 2026-03-31 11:03:10
コメント
他人の解答コメントを賛成するのも、その解答に一票を入れることになります。したがって、すでに同じ意見の投票コメントが存在する場合、新規コメントをする代わりに賛成することもできます。
コメントを通報する
コメント中
今すぐ 新規登録 / ログイン (無料です)。