DOP-C02 Exam Dumps : AWS Certified DevOps Engineer - Professional

The latency in processing and ingesting logs can be caused by several factors, such as the throughput of the Kinesis data stream, the concurrency of the Lambda function, and the configuration of the event source mapping. To reduce the latency, the following steps can be taken:

Create a data stream consumer with enhanced fan-out. Set the Lambda function that processes the logs as the consumer. This will allow the Lambda function to receive records from the data stream with dedicated throughput of up to 2 MB per second per shard, independent of other consumers1. This will reduce the contention and delay in accessing the data stream.

Increase the ParallelizationFactor setting in the Lambda event source mapping. This will allow the Lambda service to invoke more instances of the function concurrently to process the records from the data stream2. This will increase the processing capacity and reduce the backlog of records in the data stream.

Configure reserved concurrency for the Lambda function that processes the logs. This will ensure that the function has enough concurrency available to handle the increased load from the data stream3. This will prevent the function from being throttled by the account-level concurrency limit.

The other options are not effective or may have negative impacts on the latency. Option D is not suitable because increasing the batch size in the Kinesis data stream will increase the amount of data that the Lambda function has to process in each invocation, which may increase the execution time and latency4. Option E is not advisable because turning off the ReportBatchItemFailures setting in the Lambda event source mapping will prevent the Lambda service from retrying the failed records, which may result in data loss. Option F is not necessary because increasing the number of shards in the Kinesis data stream will increase the throughput of the data stream, but it will not affect the processing speed of the Lambda function, which is the bottleneck in this scenario.

1: Using AWS Lambda with Amazon Kinesis Data Streams - AWS Lambda

2: AWS Lambda event source mappings - AWS Lambda

3: Managing concurrency for a Lambda function - AWS Lambda

4: AWS Lambda function scaling - AWS Lambda

AWS Lambda event source mappings - AWS Lambda

Scaling Amazon Kinesis Data Streams with AWS CloudFormation - Amazon Kinesis Data Streams

Short Explanation: To meet the requirements, the DevOps engineer should update the SAML assertion to pass the user’s team name, update the IAM role’s trust policy to add an access-team session tag that has the team name, create an IAM permissions boundary in each account, and for each CodeCommit repository, add an access-team tag that has the value set to the name of the associated team.

Updating the SAML assertion to pass the user’s team name allows the DevOps engineer to use IAM tags to identify which team a user belongs to. This can help enforce fine-grained access control based on the user’s team membership1.

Updating the IAM role’s trust policy to add an access-team session tag that has the team name allows the DevOps engineer to use IAM condition keys to restrict access based on the session tag value2. For example, the DevOps engineer can use the aws:PrincipalTag condition key to match the access-team tag of the user with the access-team tag of the repository3.

Creating an IAM permissions boundary in each account allows the DevOps engineer to set the maximum permissions that an identity-based policy can grant to an IAM entity. An entity’s permissions boundary allows it to perform only the actions that are allowed by both its identity-based policies and its permissions boundaries4. For example, the DevOps engineer can use a permissions boundary policy to limit the actions that a user can perform on CodeCommit repositories based on their access-team tag5.

For each CodeCommit repository, adding an access-team tag that has the value set to the name of the associated team allows the DevOps engineer to use resource tags to identify which team manages a repository. This can help enforce fine-grained access control based on the resource tag value6.

The other options are incorrect because:

Creating an approval rule template for each team in the Organizations management account is not a valid option, as approval rule templates are not supported by AWS Organizations. Approval rule templates are specific to CodeCommit and can only be associated with one or more repositories in the same AWS Region where they are created7.

Creating an approval rule template for each account is not a valid option, as approval rule templates are not designed to restrict access to modify branches. Approval rule templates are designed to require approvals from specified users or groups before merging pull requests8.

Attaching an SCP to the accounts is not a valid option, as SCPs are not designed to restrict access based on tags. SCPs are designed to restrict access based on service actions and resources across all users and roles in an organization’s account9.

Using CodePipeline + CodeConnections Git repo provides version control, automated deployment, and rollback. Each template includes AWS::ControlTower::EnableControl for OU-level guardrails. AWS Control Tower documentation recommends this GitOps automation model.