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

LPI 701-100 Exam - Topic 3 Question 76 Discussion

Actual exam question for LPI's 701-100 exam
Question #: 76
Topic #: 3
[All 701-100 Questions]

A service should be provided to arbitrary clients on the Internet using HTTPS. Any standard client on the Internet should be able to consume the service without further configuration. Which of the following approaches can be used to implement these requirements? (Choose three correct answers.)

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: A

by Jovita at Sep 18, 2024, 06:22 PM

Limited Time Offer

25%

Off

Get Premium 701-100 Questions as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF

Contribute your Thoughts:

0/2000 characters
Submit Cancel
Cristy
6 months ago
D sounds like a bad idea. Why would you want plain HTTP?
upvoted 0 times
...
Katy
6 months ago
Wait, self-signed certs? Aren't they risky for public use?
upvoted 0 times
...
Ling
6 months ago
A is a big no-no! No cert means no security.
upvoted 0 times
...
Mica
7 months ago
I think E is a solid choice too! Wildcard certs save time.
upvoted 0 times
...
Chanel
7 months ago
Option C is definitely the way to go for secure deployments.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lashaunda
7 months ago
I feel like the load balancer option could work, but it might expose some security risks by sending requests in plain HTTP.
upvoted 0 times
...
Xochitl
7 months ago
I practiced a similar question where using a wildcard certificate seemed like a good choice for multiple subdomains.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lili
7 months ago
I think using a certificate issuing service is a good option, but I'm not sure if it’s necessary for every deployment.
upvoted 0 times
...
Paulene
8 months ago
I remember that using self-signed certificates isn't ideal for public services since clients won't trust them by default.
upvoted 0 times
...
Tawanna
8 months ago
Generating self-signed certs or using a certificate service both seem like viable options to meet the requirements. I'll weigh the pros and cons of each.
upvoted 0 times
...
Alex
8 months ago
I'm feeling a bit lost on this one. I'll need to review the material on SSL/TLS certificates before attempting to answer.
upvoted 0 times
...
Louisa
8 months ago
Okay, let's see - I know we need to use HTTPS, so options A and D are out. That leaves B, C, and E as the possible answers.
upvoted 0 times
...
Kenny
8 months ago
Hmm, I'm a bit unsure about the different certificate options here. I'll need to think it through carefully.
upvoted 0 times
...
Paz
8 months ago
This question seems straightforward, I think I can handle it.
upvoted 0 times
...
Shawnna
8 months ago
Okay, let me think this through. If the Active property is cleared or not enabled, then the transformation becomes passive. So I think the answer is A.
upvoted 0 times
...
Hester
1 year ago
I'm cracking up at the idea of a web server without a certificate. That's like trying to secure your house with a screen door made of tissue paper.
upvoted 0 times
Gerri
1 year ago
User 3: E) Install a wildcard certificate and the respective private key on all the backend servers sounds like a better choice.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lisandra
1 year ago
User 2: Lisandra, that's definitely not a secure option.
upvoted 0 times
...
Janae
1 year ago
User 1: A) Configure the web servers to not use a server certificate when serving HTTPS.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Kerry
1 year ago
Wait, so you're telling me I can't just leave the web servers without a certificate? That seems like a lot of work!
upvoted 0 times
Erick
11 months ago
User 3: Or you could use a certificate issuing service to request certificates.
upvoted 0 times
...
Eleonora
1 year ago
User 2: You could generate self-signed certificates during deployment.
upvoted 0 times
...
Donette
1 year ago
User 1: No, you can't leave the web servers without a certificate.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Maile
1 year ago
I think Option E is the way to go. A wildcard certificate would make it easy to deploy new backend servers without having to worry about certificates.
upvoted 0 times
Jeanice
1 year ago
I agree, having a wildcard certificate would make managing certificates much easier.
upvoted 0 times
...
Jeanice
1 year ago
Option E is definitely a good choice. It would simplify the deployment process for sure.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Edna
1 year ago
I'm not sure about option A though. Configuring web servers to not use a server certificate for HTTPS doesn't sound secure to me.
upvoted 0 times
...
Kami
1 year ago
Option D looks tempting, but I'm worried that decrypting the requests on the load balancer might introduce a security vulnerability.
upvoted 0 times
...
Davida
1 year ago
I agree with Isadora. Option E also seems like a good approach as it allows for a wildcard certificate to be installed on all backend servers.
upvoted 0 times
...
Kizzy
1 year ago
Option B and C seem like the most secure options, but I'm not sure if a self-signed certificate would be accepted by all clients on the internet.
upvoted 0 times
Lashawn
1 year ago
Self-signed certificates may not be trusted by all clients, so using a certificate issuing service could be a better option.
upvoted 0 times
...
Apolonia
1 year ago
E) Install a wildcard certificate and the respective private key on all the backend servers.
upvoted 0 times
...
Erin
1 year ago
C) Use a certificate issuing service to request certificates during each server deployment.
upvoted 0 times
...
Aleta
1 year ago
B) Generate a self-signed certificates during the deployment of each backend server.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Isadora
1 year ago
I think option C is a good choice because it ensures that certificates are requested during server deployment.
upvoted 0 times
...

Save Cancel