Question 970

An application team wants to deny Internet-originated requests to an internal ALB, but the proposed solution is to give its DNS name an obscure random prefix. Which network architecture change is materially effective?

  1. Use an internal load balancer in private subnets with no public ingress route
  2. Configure the AWS Load Balancer Controller ingress target type as ip
  3. Register the Lambda function as an ALB Lambda target
  4. Configure mutual TLS on an HTTPS listener of an Application Load Balancer

Explanation

Correct Answer

A:

Internal ALBs expose private addresses reachable through approved networks; secrecy of a DNS label does not prevent access to a publicly routable load balancer.

Incorrect Answers

B:

IP target mode registers Pod network addresses in the load balancer target group; instance target mode instead normally directs traffic through node-level ports; it is not the action that directly makes the system remove public reachability instead of hiding hostnames.

C:

An Application Load Balancer can transform supported HTTP requests into Lambda events and return its response as HTTP without an EC2 or IP target listener; that still would not establish the requested outcome: remove public reachability instead of hiding hostnames.

D:

ALB mutual authentication can verify client certificates for inbound HTTPS sessions while preserving the ability to apply application-layer listener rules; the scenario instead needs an action that will remove public reachability instead of hiding hostnames.

Question 971

A security reviewer wants private application subnets to allow HTTPS only toward approved destinations without granting the entire internet CIDR. Which maintainable rule input is useful where supported?

  1. Review the prefix list entries and the associated VPC route-table destinations for longest-prefix interactions
  2. Reference an AWS-managed prefix list in compatible egress security-group rules
  3. Evaluate the security group rules against new flows while accounting for connection tracking
  4. Create AWS Config rules for the intended network ACL compliance policy and automate response where supported

Explanation

Correct Answer

B:

Managed prefix lists can keep approved CIDR collections current for supported AWS services, reducing manually maintained broad address rules in eligible security-group configurations.

Incorrect Answers

A:

Route tables can reference customer-managed prefix lists as destinations; a changed list of prefixes can influence matching traffic even when the route itself was not individually edited; it is not the action that directly makes the system restrict HTTPS egress using maintained destination prefixes.

C:

Security groups are stateful, but replacing the rules does not grant indefinite access for new flows; connection tracking and subsequent connection establishment follow allowed traffic and rule state; the scenario instead needs an action that will restrict HTTPS egress using maintained destination prefixes.

D:

AWS Config records resource configuration and can evaluate it against guardrails; a workflow can then notify or trigger controlled remediation; those conditions do not produce the required result: restrict HTTPS egress using maintained destination prefixes.

Question 972

Security investigators need a list of source/destination IP pairs and ACCEPT or REJECT decisions observed at a particular ENI, not application payloads. Which log stream should be collected?

  1. Explain that VPC Flow Logs aggregate connection metadata and do not uniquely represent individual HTTP transactions
  2. Verify the VPC Flow Logs resource scope, traffic type, and aggregation interval
  3. Enable VPC Flow Logs for the network interface with the needed accepted and rejected traffic types
  4. Configure VPC Traffic Mirroring from the supported source ENI to an inspection target

Explanation

Correct Answer

C:

Flow Logs deliver aggregated metadata about observed IP flows and action status for the selected VPC resource; they are not packet-capture recordings.

Incorrect Answers

A:

HTTP requests may share TCP connections, and flow aggregation produces network records rather than one request row, so different record counts do not inherently mean loss; that still would not establish the requested outcome: audit observed ENI-level flow decisions.

B:

Flow Logs aggregate network-flow information over a time window and only cover selected ENIs, subnets, or VPCs; request logs and flow records are not guaranteed one-to-one; the scenario instead needs an action that will audit observed ENI-level flow decisions.

D:

Traffic Mirroring copies selected packets so the analyzer can inspect protocol exchanges; VPC Flow Logs record connection metadata rather than full packet payload; it changes a different aspect of the architecture rather than fulfilling the need to audit observed ENI-level flow decisions.

Question 973

A multi-account organization requires network flow records retained in a central analytics bucket. Local accounts currently retain only temporary CloudWatch logs. Which delivery architecture is appropriate?

  1. Verify the VPC Flow Logs resource scope, traffic type, and aggregation interval
  2. Configure VPC Traffic Mirroring from the supported source ENI to an inspection target
  3. Explain that VPC Flow Logs aggregate connection metadata and do not uniquely represent individual HTTP transactions
  4. Deliver VPC Flow Logs to a governed Amazon S3 bucket in the centralized logging environment

Explanation

Correct Answer

D:

S3 can retain aggregated flow-log objects for cross-account analysis and lifecycle controls when the destination and permissions are configured correctly.

Incorrect Answers

A:

Flow Logs aggregate network-flow information over a time window and only cover selected ENIs, subnets, or VPCs; request logs and flow records are not guaranteed one-to-one; the scenario instead needs an action that will centralize long-term network flow records.

B:

Traffic Mirroring copies selected packets so the analyzer can inspect protocol exchanges; VPC Flow Logs record connection metadata rather than full packet payload; those conditions do not produce the required result: centralize long-term network flow records.

C:

HTTP requests may share TCP connections, and flow aggregation produces network records rather than one request row, so different record counts do not inherently mean loss; it changes a different aspect of the architecture rather than fulfilling the need to centralize long-term network flow records.

Question 974

An NLB TLS listener uses an ACM certificate, but engineers need per-connection evidence about TLS versions and handshake negotiation failures. Which log family is useful for this investigation?

  1. Enable Network Load Balancer access logging for the TLS listener and inspect handshake fields
  2. Use a TCP listener on the NLB and terminate TLS at the registered backend
  3. Enable client IP preservation for the supported NLB IP target group configuration
  4. Select a supported ALB listener security policy that excludes disallowed legacy TLS protocols

Explanation

Correct Answer

A:

NLB TLS access logs provide information about TLS connections handled by supported TLS listeners, helping diagnose negotiated protocol and certificate-related handshake behavior.

Incorrect Answers

B:

A TCP listener forwards transport bytes without terminating TLS; a TLS listener would negotiate TLS at the load balancer and change where end-to-end certificate handling occurs; it changes a different aspect of the architecture rather than fulfilling the need to examine TLS negotiation at a Network Load Balancer.

C:

Depending on target type and protocol, NLB client IP preservation may need to be explicitly configured; otherwise targets can observe a translated source address; the operational gap would remain because the question requires a way to examine TLS negotiation at a Network Load Balancer.

D:

ALB security policies govern the protocols and ciphers accepted by its TLS listener; rotating the certificate alone does not disable old protocol versions; it is not the action that directly makes the system examine TLS negotiation at a Network Load Balancer.

Question 975

A security team wants to know whether AWS WAF applied a block action to individual requests at a public ALB. Aggregated metric counts are insufficient. Which data capture is best?

  1. Add an AWS WAF rate-based rule with the intended aggregation key and block action
  2. Enable AWS WAF request logging and inspect the recorded actions and matching rules
  3. Use AWS Firewall Manager with an appropriately scoped AWS WAF policy
  4. Apply an AWS WAF managed or custom SQL injection match rule to the application's web ACL

Explanation

Correct Answer

B:

WAF logs show per-request evaluated rule actions and relevant request attributes, supporting investigation beyond high-level web ACL metric counts.

Incorrect Answers

A:

Rate-based rules count requests over a configurable evaluation window using the selected aggregation key and apply the configured action after the rate limit is exceeded; it changes a different aspect of the architecture rather than fulfilling the need to review exact WAF decisions for HTTP requests.

C:

Firewall Manager can apply and audit centrally defined security policies across eligible accounts and resources under AWS Organizations, reducing individual distribution policy drift; it is not the action that directly makes the system review exact WAF decisions for HTTP requests.

D:

WAF inspects supported HTTP request components and can block matching application-layer attack patterns before the request reaches the origin; that still would not establish the requested outcome: review exact WAF decisions for HTTP requests.

Question 976

An organization purchased Shield Advanced for eligible public resources and must alert operators to a detected DDoS event. Which telemetry and notifications can support the workflow?

  1. Monitor CloudFront cache statistics and origin error metrics in separate CloudWatch dashboards
  2. Enable AWS WAF request logging and inspect the recorded actions and matching rules
  3. Monitor Shield Advanced DDoS events and supported CloudWatch metrics with notification rules
  4. Enable CloudFront Origin Shield in a strategically chosen Region

Explanation

Correct Answer

C:

Shield Advanced exposes additional protection visibility for enrolled resources, while alarms and supported notifications can direct staff to a detected event.

Incorrect Answers

A:

Edge hit rates describe cache behavior, whereas origin errors diagnose backend responses; combining them as one success percentage obscures different failure causes; the operational gap would remain because the question requires a way to alert on detected DDoS activity.

B:

WAF logs show per-request evaluated rule actions and relevant request attributes, supporting investigation beyond high-level web ACL metric counts; it is not the action that directly makes the system alert on detected DDoS activity.

D:

Origin Shield adds a centralized caching layer between regional caches and the origin, improving cache reuse for requests arriving through multiple regional caches and reducing duplicate fetches; the scenario instead needs an action that will alert on detected DDoS activity.

Question 977

An incident report requires proof that production VPCs have no permissible path from an external-facing load balancer to a regulated database subnet. Which automated control-plane analysis can assess the intended path?

  1. Use narrowly scoped IAM deployment roles and trace provisioning changes in AWS CloudTrail
  2. Use VPC Network Access Analyzer with a scope and finding condition matching the prohibited path
  3. Run VPC Reachability Analyzer between the source and destination path endpoints
  4. Review the finding type, affected resource, network details, and associated GuardDuty context

Explanation

Correct Answer

B:

Network Access Analyzer evaluates modeled VPC networking configurations against defined access requirements and identifies unintended access patterns without generating live application packets.

Incorrect Answers

A:

IAM roles constrain which networking APIs automation can call, and CloudTrail supplies audit events for changes; storing broad permanent access keys in pipeline code weakens control; it is not the action that directly makes the system audit policy-forbidden network paths.

C:

Reachability Analyzer models routing and security configuration to identify a blocking component; it is not a live probe that demonstrates application process health; the scenario instead needs an action that will audit policy-forbidden network paths.

D:

GuardDuty correlates supported telemetry to generate potential threat findings, which can provide enrichment for triage but are not a packet-by-packet capture of the session; those conditions do not produce the required result: audit policy-forbidden network paths.

Question 978

A security group is accidentally opened to 0.0.0.0/0 on an administrative port. The audit team needs a historical timeline of the configuration and compliance status. Which service supplies that history?

  1. Evaluate the security group rules against new flows while accounting for connection tracking
  2. Permit DNS traffic on the outbound endpoint security group toward the corporate DNS targets
  3. Use AWS Config configuration history and rules for security-group exposure monitoring
  4. Create AWS Config rules for the intended network ACL compliance policy and automate response where supported

Explanation

Correct Answer

C:

AWS Config records supported resource configuration changes and can evaluate guardrails over time; CloudWatch connection metrics do not preserve the resource's compliance timeline.

Incorrect Answers

A:

Security groups are stateful, but replacing the rules does not grant indefinite access for new flows; connection tracking and subsequent connection establishment follow allowed traffic and rule state; that still would not establish the requested outcome: reconstruct historical security-group exposure.

B:

Resolver forwarding generates DNS queries from the endpoint ENIs; restrictive security-group egress and return-path routing can prevent a valid forwarding rule from delivering them; the scenario instead needs an action that will reconstruct historical security-group exposure.

D:

AWS Config records resource configuration and can evaluate it against guardrails; a workflow can then notify or trigger controlled remediation; it changes a different aspect of the architecture rather than fulfilling the need to reconstruct historical security-group exposure.

Question 979

A GuardDuty finding reports unusual outbound network communication from one EC2 instance. The responder needs a managed threat signal associated with the instance rather than raw packet capture. What evidence should be inspected?

  1. Create an AWS Config aggregator covering the relevant organization accounts and Regions
  2. Review the finding type, affected resource, network details, and associated GuardDuty context
  3. Use VPC Network Access Analyzer with a scope and finding condition matching the prohibited path
  4. Run VPC Reachability Analyzer between the source and destination path endpoints

Explanation

Correct Answer

B:

GuardDuty correlates supported telemetry to generate potential threat findings, which can provide enrichment for triage but are not a packet-by-packet capture of the session.

Incorrect Answers

A:

Aggregators collect configuration and compliance information across authorized accounts and Regions to support centralized queries and dashboards, while rule evaluation remains tied to the sources; the scenario instead needs an action that will triage managed EC2 network threat findings.

C:

Network Access Analyzer evaluates modeled VPC networking configurations against defined access requirements and identifies unintended access patterns without generating live application packets; it changes a different aspect of the architecture rather than fulfilling the need to triage managed EC2 network threat findings.

D:

Reachability Analyzer models routing and security configuration to identify a blocking component; it is not a live probe that demonstrates application process health; the operational gap would remain because the question requires a way to triage managed EC2 network threat findings.

Question 980

A compliance dashboard must alert when AWS Network Firewall records multiple rejected outbound connections to an embargoed subnet. Which pipeline supports quantitative notification?

  1. Deliver Network Firewall logs to a supported destination and derive CloudWatch metrics and alarms for matching events
  2. Configure supported Network Firewall TLS SNI or domain-list matching with the intended stateful rule action
  3. Place AWS Network Firewall endpoints in the centralized egress path and route inspected traffic through them
  4. Examine AWS Network Firewall alert and flow logs with the configured stateful rule action

Explanation

Correct Answer

A:

Firewall flow or alert logs describe inspection events, while derived metrics and alarms can notify responders when defined event counts exceed thresholds.

Incorrect Answers

B:

Stateful domain inspection can examine supported protocol metadata such as TLS SNI without full TLS decryption; it cannot classify traffic lacking the inspected hostname signal; it changes a different aspect of the architecture rather than fulfilling the need to alert on logged inspection denies.

C:

Network Firewall processes packets according to configured stateless and stateful policies; the surrounding subnet/TGW routing must force both relevant directions through the endpoints; the operational gap would remain because the question requires a way to alert on logged inspection denies.

D:

An alert action records a match without necessarily dropping the traffic, while a drop or reject action changes data-plane delivery; rule action and event evidence must be read together; it is not the action that directly makes the system alert on logged inspection denies.

AWS Certified Advanced Networking - Specialty ANS-C01 Practice Tests