Deal of The Day! Hurry Up, Grab the Special Discount - Save 25% - Ends In 00:00:00 Coupon code: SAVE25
Welcome to Pass4Success

- Free Preparation Discussions
Mail Us support@pass4success.com
Location US
Mob_nav_barsMENU

Docker Exam DCA Topic 4 Question 101 Discussion

Actual exam question for Docker's DCA exam
Question #: 101
Topic #: 4
[All DCA Questions]

A company's security policy specifies that development and production containers must run on separate nodes in a given Swarm cluster.

Can this be used to schedule containers to meet the security policy requirements?

Solution: label contraints

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: B

: = Keeping a backup copy of the image on another repository is not how a user can prevent an image, such as 'nginx:latest', from being overwritten by another user with push access to the repository. This approach does not prevent the original image from being overwritten, it only provides a way to restore it from another source. However, this may not be reliable or efficient, as the backup repository may not be in sync with the original one, or may not be accessible at all times.To prevent an image from being overwritten by another user, the user can use the DTR web UI to make the tag immutable1. This feature allows the user to lock a specific tag, so that no one can push a new image with the same tag to the repository.This ensures that the image is always consistent and secure1.Reference:

Make a tag immutable | Docker Docs


by Charlene at Sep 16, 2024, 06:36 AM

Limited Time Offer

25%

Off

Get Premium DCA Questions as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF

Contribute your Thoughts:

Submit Cancel
Cristen
2 months ago
I'm pretty sure the answer is A. What, did you think I was going to go with B? I'm not falling for that one again.
upvoted 0 times
Antonette
9 days ago
I'm pretty sure the answer is A. What, did you think I was going to go with B? I'm not falling for that one again.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lottie
11 days ago
Definitely, using label constraints is the way to go to ensure containers are scheduled properly.
upvoted 0 times
...
Tegan
13 days ago
B) No
upvoted 0 times
...
Kanisha
13 days ago
I agree, it seems like the best option to meet the security policy requirements.
upvoted 0 times
...
Delfina
14 days ago
Yes
upvoted 0 times
...
Venita
20 days ago
A) Yes
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Timmy
2 months ago
Yes, label constraints are the way to go. Now, if only I could find a label that says 'keep the boss away from the production server'.
upvoted 0 times
...
Vivan
2 months ago
Label constraints? That's like using duct tape to fix a leaky faucet. It'll probably work, but it ain't pretty.
upvoted 0 times
Scarlet
18 days ago
Label constraints? That's like using duct tape to fix a leaky faucet. It'll probably work, but it ain't pretty.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lonny
19 days ago
B) No
upvoted 0 times
...
Wava
1 months ago
A) Yes
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Teresita
2 months ago
Ah, the old 'separate nodes' conundrum. I bet the security team has been having a field day with this one.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lashunda
3 months ago
I think the solution provided is effective in meeting the security policy requirements, so I would go with option A) Yes.
upvoted 0 times
...
Isaiah
3 months ago
I agree with Goldie, using label constraints is a good way to ensure containers are running on separate nodes for security purposes.
upvoted 0 times
...
Goldie
3 months ago
Yes, we can use label constraints to schedule containers on separate nodes.
upvoted 0 times
...

Save Cancel