Cyber Monday 2024! Hurry Up, Grab the Special Discount - Save 25% - Ends In 00:00:00 Coupon code: SAVE25
Welcome to Pass4Success

- Free Preparation Discussions

Microsoft Exam MB-820 Topic 3 Question 1 Discussion

Actual exam question for Microsoft's MB-820 exam
Question #: 1
Topic #: 3
[All MB-820 Questions]

Note: This question is part of a series of questions that present the same scenario. Each question in the series contains a unique solution that might meet the stated goals. Some question set might have more than one correct solution, while others might not have a correct solution.

After you answer a question in this section, you will NOT be able to return to it. As a result, these questions will not appear on the review screen.

A company creates a Business Central app and a table named MyTable to store records when sales orders are posted.

Users report the following issues:

* The users receive permission errors related to MyTable.

* Users are no longer able to post sales orders since installing the new app.

* The users cannot access the list page created in MyTable.

You need to resolve the user issues without creating new permission sets. You must use the principle of least privilege.

Solution: Decorate the event subscriber used for inserting data in MyTable by entering (lnherentPermissions(PermissionOb]ectType:TableDat

a. Database:MyTable. 'R')]

Does the solution meet the goal?

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: A

Using InherentPermissions in an event subscriber with the specified syntax could potentially resolve the permission issues related to MyTable, provided that the permissions specified (in this case, 'R' for Read) align with the minimum necessary for the users to perform their tasks. This approach allows the app to grant permissions dynamically based on the context of the event subscriber, which in this case is involved with inserting data into MyTable. By granting Read permission at the event level, it ensures that users have the necessary permissions to interact with MyTable in the context of the operations facilitated by the event subscriber, without needing to alter existing permission sets or grant broader permissions than necessary. This solution adheres to the principle of least privilege by ensuring that permissions are granted only within the narrow scope needed for specific operations, thereby potentially resolving the reported user issues in a secure and controlled manner.


Contribute your Thoughts:

Jeannine
7 months ago
I believe the solution provided in the question is not sufficient to fully resolve the reported problems.
upvoted 0 times
...
Albert
7 months ago
I think we should explore other options to make sure all user issues are resolved.
upvoted 0 times
...
Margot
7 months ago
I disagree, the solution may not address all the reported issues with MyTable.
upvoted 0 times
...
Graham
7 months ago
Yes, the solution seems appropriate as it uses the principle of least privilege.
upvoted 0 times
...
Malinda
8 months ago
Okay, let me think this through. The users are experiencing issues with permissions on MyTable, and they can't post sales orders or access the list page. The solution suggests using InherentPermissions, which sounds like it might grant the necessary permissions without creating new permission sets. But I agree with the others – it seems a bit of a band-aid approach. I think we need to dig deeper and see if there's a more robust solution that truly adheres to the principle of least privilege.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lashunda
8 months ago
Hmm, I'm not sure about this one. Decorating the event subscriber with InherentPermissions sounds like a workaround, but it might not be the most elegant solution. I mean, we're supposed to use the principle of least privilege, and I'm not convinced this approach is truly the 'least' privileged. Maybe there's a better way to handle this without resorting to such a hack-ish solution.
upvoted 0 times
...
Dolores
8 months ago
Hey, you know what they say – 'if it's stupid but it works, it ain't stupid.' Maybe this InherentPermissions thing is just the ticket. I mean, the question specifically states we can't create new permission sets, so this could be the only viable solution. And hey, if it gets the job done, who cares if it's a little hacky, right? *chuckles*
upvoted 0 times
Kate
7 months ago
Agreed, we shouldn't take shortcuts when it comes to permissions.
upvoted 0 times
...
Whitley
7 months ago
B) No
upvoted 0 times
...
Inocencia
8 months ago
Exactly, as long as it solves the issue without compromising security.
upvoted 0 times
...
Celia
8 months ago
A) Yes
upvoted 0 times
...
Bette
8 months ago
I think we should stick to the principle of least privilege.
upvoted 0 times
...
Ailene
8 months ago
B) No
upvoted 0 times
...
Lashawnda
8 months ago
Absolutely, sometimes you gotta do what you gotta do.
upvoted 0 times
...
Hyman
8 months ago
A) Yes
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Rosita
8 months ago
Haha, true that. Sometimes you gotta do what you gotta do, even if it's not the prettiest solution. But still, I can't help but feel a little uneasy about it. I mean, what if there are some unintended consequences down the line? We should probably give it a thorough test before implementing it in a production environment.
upvoted 0 times
...

Save Cancel
az-700  pass4success  az-104  200-301  200-201  cissp  350-401  350-201  350-501  350-601  350-801  350-901  az-720  az-305  pl-300  

Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /pass.php:70) in /pass.php on line 77