Pass the Amazon Web Services AWS Certified Data Engineer Data-Engineer-Associate Questions and answers with CertsForce

The data engineer needs to detect custom categories of PII within the data lake using AWS Glue DataBrew. While DataBrew provides standard data quality rules, the solution must support custom PII categories.

Option B: Implement custom data quality rules in DataBrew. Apply the custom rules across datasets.This option is the most efficient because DataBrew allows the creation of custom data quality rules that can be applied to detect specific data patterns, including custom PII categories. This approach minimizes operational overhead while ensuring that the specific privacy requirements are met.

Options A, C, and D either involve manual intervention or developing custom scripts, both of which increase operational effort compared to using DataBrew's built-in capabilities.

Step 1: Understand the Data Access Requirements

The question presents distinct access needs for three teams:

Marketing team: Needs full access to customer contact info but only obfuscated claim information.

Claims team: Needs access to customer information relevant to the claims they process.

Analytics team: Needs only obfuscated PII data.

These teams require different levels of access, and the solution needs to enforce data security while keeping administrative overhead low.

Step 2: Why Option B is Correct

Option B (Creating Views) is a common best practice in Amazon Redshift to restrict access to specific data without duplicating data or managing multiple clusters. By creating views:

You can define customized views of the data with obfuscated fields for the analytics team and marketing team while still providing full access where necessary.

Views provide a logical separation of data and allow Redshift administrators to grant access permissions based on roles or groups, ensuring that each team sees only what they are allowed to.

Obfuscation or masking of PII can be easily applied to the views by transforming or hiding sensitive data fields.

This approach avoids the complexity of managing multiple Redshift clusters or S3-based data lakes, which introduces higher operational and administrative overhead.

Step 3: Why Other Options Are Not Ideal

Option A (Separate Redshift Clusters) introduces unnecessary administrative overhead by managing multiple clusters. Maintaining several clusters for each team is costly, redundant, and inefficient.

Option C (Separate Redshift Roles) involves creating multiple roles and managing complex masking policies, which adds to administrative burden and complexity. While Redshift does support column-level access control, it's still more overhead than managing simple views.

Option D (Move to S3 and Lake Formation) is a more complex and heavy-handed solution, especially when the data is already stored in Redshift. Migrating the data to S3 and setting up a data lake with Lake Formation introduces significant operational complexity that isn't needed for this specific requirement.

Conclusion:

Creating views in Amazon Redshift allows for flexible, fine-grained access control with minimal overhead, making it the optimal solution to meet the data access requirements of the marketing, claims, and analytics teams.

 Amazon Redshift Spectrum is a feature that allows you to run SQL queries directly against data in Amazon S3, without loading or transforming the data. Redshift Spectrum can query various data formats, such as CSV, JSON, ORC, Avro, and Parquet. However, not all data formats are equally efficient for querying. Some data formats, such as CSV and JSON, are row-oriented, meaning that they store data as a sequence of records, each with the same fields. Row-oriented formats are suitable for loading and exporting data, but they are not optimal for analytical queries that often access only a subset of columns. Row-oriented formats also do not support compression or encoding techniques that can reduce the data size and improve the query performance.

On the other hand, some data formats, such as ORC and Parquet, are column-oriented, meaning that they store data as a collection of columns, each with a specific data type. Column-oriented formats are ideal for analytical queries that often filter, aggregate, or join data by columns. Column-oriented formats also support compression and encoding techniques that can reduce the data size and improve the query performance. For example, Parquet supports dictionary encoding, which replaces repeated values with numeric codes, and run-length encoding, which replaces consecutive identical values with a single value and a count. Parquet also supports various compression algorithms, such as Snappy, GZIP, and ZSTD, that can further reduce the data size and improve the query performance.

Therefore, using a columnar storage file format, such as Parquet, will provide faster queries, as it allows Redshift Spectrum to scan only the relevant columns and skip the rest, reducing the amount of data read from S3. Additionally, partitioning the data based on the most common query predicates, such as date, time, region, etc., will provide faster queries, as it allows Redshift Spectrum to prune the partitions that do not match the query criteria, reducing the amount of data scanned from S3. Partitioning also improves the performance of joins and aggregations, as it reduces data skew and shuffling.

The other options are not as effective as using a columnar storage file format and partitioning the data. Using gzip compression to compress individual files to sizes that are between 1 GB and 5 GB will reduce the data size, but it will not improve the query performance significantly, as gzip is not a splittable compression algorithm and requires decompression before reading. Splitting the data into files that are less than 10 KB will increase the number of files and the metadata overhead, which will degrade the query performance. Using file formats that are not supported by Redshift Spectrum, such as XML, will not work, as Redshift Spectrum will not be able to read or parse the data. References:

Amazon Redshift Spectrum

Choosing the Right Data Format

AWS Certified Data Engineer - Associate DEA-C01 Complete Study Guide, Chapter 4: Data Lakes and Data Warehouses, Section 4.3: Amazon Redshift Spectrum

The data engineer needs to ensure that the data in an Amazon EMR cluster is encrypted both at rest and in transit. The data in Amazon S3 is already encrypted using an AWS KMS key. To meet the requirements, the most suitable solution is to create an EMR security configuration that specifies the correct KMS key for at-rest encryption and use the PEM file for in-transit encryption.

Option C: Create an Amazon EMR security configuration. Specify the appropriate AWS KMS key for at-rest encryption for the S3 bucket. Specify the Amazon S3 path of the PEM file for in-transit encryption. Use the security configuration during EMR cluster creation.This option configures encryption for both data at rest (using KMS keys) and data in transit (using the PEM file for SSL/TLS encryption). This approach ensures that data is fully protected during storage and transfer.

Options A, B, and D either involve creating unnecessary additional security configurations or make inaccurate assumptions about the way encryption configurations are attached.

The company wants to ensure that no customer records are deleted or modified for 7 years, and even the root user should not have the ability to change the data. S3 Object Lock in Compliance Mode is the correct solution for this scenario.

Option B: Enable compliance mode on the S3 bucket. Use a default retention period of 7 years.In Compliance Mode, even the root user cannot delete or modify locked objects during the retention period. This ensures that the data is protected for the entire 7-year duration as required. Compliance mode is stricter than governance mode and prevents all forms of alteration, even by privileged users.

Option A (Governance Mode) still allows certain privileged users (like the root user) to bypass the lock, which does not meet the company's requirement. Option C (legal hold) and Option D (setting retention per object) do not fully address the requirement to block root user modifications.

The best solution to meet the requirements of creating a data catalog that includes the IoT data, and allowing the analytics department to index the data, most cost-effectively, is to create an Amazon Athena workgroup, explore the data that is in Amazon S3 by using Apache Spark through Athena, and provide the Athena workgroup schema and tables to the analytics department.

Amazon Athena is a serverless, interactive query service that makes it easy to analyze data directly in Amazon S3 using standard SQL or Python1. Amazon Athena also supports Apache Spark, an open-source distributed processing framework that can run large-scale data analytics applications across clusters of servers2. You can use Athena to run Spark code on data in Amazon S3 without having to set up, manage, or scale any infrastructure. You can also use Athena to create and manage external tables that point to your data in Amazon S3, and store them in an external data catalog, such as AWS Glue Data Catalog, Amazon Athena Data Catalog, or your own Apache Hive metastore3. You can create Athena workgroups to separate query execution and resource allocation based on different criteria, such as users, teams, or applications4. You can share the schemas and tables in your Athena workgroup with other users or applications, such as Amazon QuickSight, for data visualization and analysis5.

Using Athena and Spark to create a data catalog and explore the IoT data in Amazon S3 is the most cost-effective solution, as you pay only for the queries you run or the compute you use, and you pay nothing when the service is idle1. You also save on the operational overhead and complexity of managing data warehouse infrastructure, as Athena and Spark are serverless and scalable. You can also benefit from the flexibility and performance of Athena and Spark, as they support various data formats, including JSON, and can handle schema changes and complex queries efficiently.

Option A is not the best solution, as creating an AWS Glue Data Catalog, configuring an AWS Glue Schema Registry, creating a new AWS Glue workload to orchestrate the ingestion of the data that the analytics department will use into Amazon Redshift Serverless, would incur more costs and complexity than using Athena and Spark. AWS Glue Data Catalog is a persistent metadata store that contains table definitions, job definitions, and other control information to help you manage your AWS Glue components6. AWS Glue Schema Registry is a service that allows you to centrally store and manage the schemas of your streaming data in AWS Glue Data Catalog7. AWS Glue is a serverless data integration service that makes it easy to prepare, clean, enrich, and move data between data stores8. Amazon Redshift Serverless is a feature of Amazon Redshift, a fully managed data warehouse service, that allows you to run and scale analytics without having to manage data warehouse infrastructure9. While these services are powerful and useful for many data engineering scenarios, they are not necessary or cost-effective for creating a data catalog and indexing the IoT data in Amazon S3. AWS Glue Data Catalog and Schema Registry charge you based on the number of objects stored and the number of requests made67. AWS Glue charges you based on the compute time and the data processed by your ETL jobs8. Amazon Redshift Serverless charges you based on the amount of data scanned by your queries and the compute time used by your workloads9. These costs can add up quickly, especially if you have large volumes of IoT data and frequent schema changes. Moreover, using AWS Glue and Amazon Redshift Serverless would introduce additional latency and complexity, as you would have to ingest the data from Amazon S3 to Amazon Redshift Serverless, and then query it from there, instead of querying it directly from Amazon S3 using Athena and Spark.

Option B is not the best solution, as creating an Amazon Redshift provisioned cluster, creating an Amazon Redshift Spectrum database for the analytics department to explore the data that is in Amazon S3, and creating Redshift stored procedures to load the data into Amazon Redshift, would incur more costs and complexity than using Athena and Spark. Amazon Redshift provisioned clusters are clusters that you create and manage by specifying the number and type of nodes, and the amount of storage and compute capacity10. Amazon Redshift Spectrum is a feature of Amazon Redshift that allows you to query and join data across your data warehouse and your data lake using standard SQL11. Redshift stored procedures are SQL statements that you can define and store in Amazon Redshift, and then call them by using the CALL command12. While these features are powerful and useful for many data warehousing scenarios, they are not necessary or cost-effective for creating a data catalog and indexing the IoT data in Amazon S3. Amazon Redshift provisioned clusters charge you based on the node type, the number of nodes, and the duration of the cluster10. Amazon Redshift Spectrum charges you based on the amount of data scanned by your queries11. These costs can add up quickly, especially if you have large volumes of IoT data and frequent schema changes. Moreover, using Amazon Redshift provisioned clusters and Spectrum would introduce additional latency and complexity, as you would have to provision and manage the cluster, create an external schema and database for the data in Amazon S3, and load the data into the cluster using stored procedures, instead of querying it directly from Amazon S3 using Athena and Spark.

Option D is not the best solution, as creating an AWS Glue Data Catalog, configuring an AWS Glue Schema Registry, creating AWS Lambda user defined functions (UDFs) by using the Amazon Redshift Data API, and creating an AWS Step Functions job to orchestrate the ingestion of the data that the analytics department will use into Amazon Redshift Serverless, would incur more costs and complexity than using Athena and Spark. AWS Lambda is a serverless compute service that lets you run code without provisioning or managing servers13. AWS Lambda UDFs are Lambda functions that you can invoke from within an Amazon Redshift query. Amazon Redshift Data API is a service that allows you to run SQL statements on Amazon Redshift clusters using HTTP requests, without needing a persistent connection. AWS Step Functions is a service that lets you coordinate multiple AWS services into serverless workflows. While these services are powerful and useful for many data engineering scenarios, they are not necessary or cost-effective for creating a data catalog and indexing the IoT data in Amazon S3. AWS Glue Data Catalog and Schema Registry charge you based on the number of objects stored and the number of requests made67. AWS Lambda charges you based on the number of requests and the duration of your functions13. Amazon Redshift Serverless charges you based on the amount of data scanned by your queries and the compute time used by your workloads9. AWS Step Functions charges you based on the number of state transitions in your workflows. These costs can add up quickly, especially if you have large volumes of IoT data and frequent schema changes. Moreover, using AWS Glue, AWS Lambda, Amazon Redshift Data API, and AWS Step Functions would introduce additional latency and complexity, as you would have to create and invoke Lambda functions to ingest the data from Amazon S3 to Amazon Redshift Serverless using the Data API, and coordinate the ingestion process using Step Functions, instead of querying it directly from Amazon S3 using Athena and Spark. References:

What is Amazon Athena?

Apache Spark on Amazon Athena

Creating tables, updating the schema, and adding new partitions in the Data Catalog from AWS Glue ETL jobs

Managing Athena workgroups

Using Amazon QuickSight to visualize data in Amazon Athena

AWS Glue Data Catalog

AWS Glue Schema Registry

What is AWS Glue?

Amazon Redshift Serverless

Amazon Redshift provisioned clusters

Querying external data using Amazon Redshift Spectrum

Using stored procedures in Amazon Redshift

What is AWS Lambda?

[Creating and using AWS Lambda UDFs]

[Using the Amazon Redshift Data API]

[What is AWS Step Functions?]

AWS Certified Data Engineer - Associate DEA-C01 Complete Study Guide

The correct answer is D: Enable native Amazon RDS database audit logging with CloudWatch and CloudTrail integration.

Native RDS database audit logging captures SQL-level activities, including which user is modifying data, which is essential for meeting audit requirements.

Amazon CloudWatch Logs can be used to centralize and store logs.

CloudTrail logs API calls related to instance-level changes, ensuring all modifications are traceable.

This approach provides a comprehensive audit trail and supports compliance with security governance policies.

“Enable and configure native Amazon RDS database audit logging. Enable Amazon CloudWatch Logs. Configure metric filters and alarms. Configure AWS CloudTrail audit logging.”

AWS Lake Formation is a service that helps you build, secure, and manage data lakes on Amazon S3. You can use AWS Lake Formation to register the S3 path as a data lake location, and enable fine-grained access control to limit access to the records based on the HR department’s Region. You can use data filters to specify which S3 prefixes or partitions each HR department can access, and grant permissions to the IAM roles of the HR departments accordingly. This solution will meet the requirement with the least operational overhead, as it simplifies the data lake management and security, and leverages the existing IAM roles of the HR departments12.

The other options are not optimal for the following reasons:

A. Use data filters for each Region to register the S3 paths as data locations. This option is not possible, as data filters are not used to register S3 paths as data locations, but to grant permissions to access specific S3 prefixes or partitions within a data location. Moreover, this option does not specify how to limit access to the records based on the HR department’s Region.

C. Modify the IAM roles of the HR departments to add a data filter for each department’s Region. This option is not possible, as data filters are not added to IAM roles, but to permissions granted by AWS Lake Formation. Moreover, this option does not specify how to register the S3 path as a data lake location, or how to enable fine-grained access control in AWS Lake Formation.

E. Create a separate S3 bucket for each Region. Configure an IAM policy to allow S3 access. Restrict access based on Region. This option is not recommended, as it would require more operational overhead to create and manage multiple S3 buckets, and to configure and maintain IAM policies for each HR department. Moreover, this option does not leverage the benefits of AWS Lake Formation, such as data cataloging, data transformation, and data governance.

1: AWS Lake Formation

2: AWS Lake Formation Permissions

AWS Identity and Access Management

Amazon S3