New Year Sale 2026! 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

Microsoft DP-300 Exam - Topic 11 Question 102 Discussion

Actual exam question for Microsoft's DP-300 exam
Question #: 102
Topic #: 11
[All DP-300 Questions]

You have an Azure subscription that contains an Azure Data Factory version 2 (V2) data factory named df1.

DF1 contains a linked service.

You have an Azure Key vault named vault1 that contains an encryption kay named key1.

You need to encrypt df1 by using key1.

What should you do first?

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: B

by Ammie at Sep 17, 2024, 04:44 AM

Limited Time Offer

25%

Off

Get Premium DP-300 Questions as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF

Contribute your Thoughts:

0/2000 characters
Submit Cancel
Angella
3 months ago
Agreed, A seems like the right move to start with.
upvoted 0 times
...
Gabriele
3 months ago
Wait, can you really disable soft delete on a Key Vault? Sounds risky!
upvoted 0 times
...
Leah
4 months ago
Definitely not C, self-hosted integration runtime isn't needed here.
upvoted 0 times
...
Rima
4 months ago
I thought you had to remove the linked service first?
upvoted 0 times
...
Amira
4 months ago
You need to disable purge protection first.
upvoted 0 times
...
Rodolfo
4 months ago
Disabling soft delete seems risky; I feel like we should be focusing on securing the Key Vault instead.
upvoted 0 times
...
Josphine
5 months ago
Creating a self-hosted integration runtime sounds familiar, but I can't remember if that's necessary for encryption.
upvoted 0 times
...
Marya
5 months ago
I remember a practice question about linked services, but I can't recall if we need to remove it before encrypting.
upvoted 0 times
...
Ettie
5 months ago
I think we might need to check the settings of the Key Vault first, but I'm not sure if disabling purge protection is the right step.
upvoted 0 times
...
Aimee
5 months ago
I'm not entirely sure about this one. Removing the linked service from the Data Factory seems like it might be a step in the right direction, but I'm not confident that's the first thing I should do. I'll need to carefully consider each option and the overall workflow.
upvoted 0 times
...
Alyce
5 months ago
Okay, I think I've got this. The first step is to ensure the Key Vault is properly configured to allow the Data Factory to access the encryption key. Disabling purge protection or soft delete seems like the right approach, but I'll need to double-check the details.
upvoted 0 times
...
Nohemi
5 months ago
Hmm, I'm a bit confused about the difference between disabling purge protection and disabling soft delete. I'll need to review the Azure Key Vault documentation to understand the implications of each option.
upvoted 0 times
...
Gerry
5 months ago
This looks like a straightforward question about encrypting an Azure Data Factory using a key from an Azure Key Vault. I'll need to carefully read through the options and think about the logical steps required.
upvoted 0 times
...
Patti
5 months ago
Ah, I see now. The availability of interfaces and standards/legal requirements are clearly technical design factors, so the data used by the SUT must be the odd one out. Got it!
upvoted 0 times
...
Walker
10 months ago
Encrypt the data factory? I thought we were supposed to encrypt the Azure subscription. I've been studying the wrong thing all this time!
upvoted 0 times
...
Wei
10 months ago
Okay, let's think this through. If we remove the linked service, how are we going to encrypt the data factory? I'm going with D, it's the only sensible choice.
upvoted 0 times
Xuan
9 months ago
Agreed, disabling soft delete on vault1 is the first step to encrypt df1.
upvoted 0 times
...
Ariel
9 months ago
That makes sense, we need to ensure the data is properly encrypted.
upvoted 0 times
...
Werner
9 months ago
I think we should disable soft delete on vault1.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Shawnda
10 months ago
Wait, what? Disable purge protection? That's like trying to put a lock on an open door. Let's go with D and get this done.
upvoted 0 times
Kristel
9 months ago
Alright, let's disable soft delete on vault1 to encrypt df1 using key1.
upvoted 0 times
...
Harrison
9 months ago
Agreed, that seems like the right step to take.
upvoted 0 times
...
Noelia
9 months ago
Let's go with option D and disable soft delete on vault1.
upvoted 0 times
...
Helaine
9 months ago
Agreed. Disabling soft delete on vault1 will help us encrypt df1 using key1.
upvoted 0 times
...
Herminia
9 months ago
That sounds like a good plan. We need to make sure the data is secure.
upvoted 0 times
...
Juan
10 months ago
Let's go with option D and disable soft delete on vault1.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Shannon
11 months ago
C'mon, it's not that hard! Clearly, we need to create a self-hosted integration runtime, that's the only way to encrypt the data factory. Piece of cake!
upvoted 0 times
Annette
9 months ago
D) Disable soft delete on vault1.
upvoted 0 times
...
Latrice
9 months ago
C) Create a self-hosted integration runtime.
upvoted 0 times
...
Kimi
9 months ago
B) Remove the linked service from df1.
upvoted 0 times
...
Shawn
9 months ago
A) Disable purge protection on vault1.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Ora
11 months ago
I'm not sure about that. I think we should disable purge protection on vault1 before encrypting df1.
upvoted 0 times
...
Art
11 months ago
Hmm, I think the answer is D. Disabling soft delete on vault1 seems to be the logical first step before encrypting the data factory.
upvoted 0 times
Cathrine
10 months ago
D) Disable soft delete on vault1.
upvoted 0 times
...
Kate
10 months ago
A) Disable purge protection on vault1.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Martina
11 months ago
I agree with Launa. Encrypting df1 with key1 requires us to create a self-hosted integration runtime first.
upvoted 0 times
...
Launa
11 months ago
I think the first thing we should do is create a self-hosted integration runtime.
upvoted 0 times
...

Save Cancel