A company is developing a new mobile app for social media sharing. The company's development team has decided to use Amazon S3 to store at media files generated by mobile app users. The company…

Question

Options

• AUse individual ACLs on each S3 object.
• BUse IAM groups tor sharing files between application social network users
• CStore each user's files in a separate S3 bucket and apery a bucket policy based on the user's
• DGenerate presigned UPLs for each file access

• A
  72% (23)
• B
  3% (1)
• C
  16% (5)
• D
  9% (3)

Explanation

S3 object ACLs let the app programmatically set per-object permissions (public-read, private, or grant access to specific AWS canonical user IDs) at the moment a user changes their sharing preference - no manual admin work required, just an API call from the app. B is wrong because IAM groups are for AWS account users, not consumer app users; creating IAM identities for millions of social media users is neither practical nor intended use. C is wrong because provisioning a separate S3 bucket per user violates S3's account limits (100 by default) and multiplies bucket policy management overhead enormously. D is wrong because presigned URLs expire and must be regenerated on every access, making them suitable for temporary one-time downloads, not persistent "public/private/shared" states.

Memory tip: Think "ACL = per-object toggle" - just like a file's read/write permission bit, an S3 ACL travels with the object and can be flipped by the app in one API call, keeping admin effort at zero.

No community discussion yet for this question.