Exam 220-1102 topic 1 question 177 discussion

Some specialized software requires an external hardware token (such as a USB dongle) to verify its authorization before it can be run. The token serves as a licensing key, providing an extra layer of security to prevent unauthorized use or duplication of the software. By attaching the required external hardware token, the technician should be able to resolve the issue and allow the software to run.

"Specialized software" + "Not authorized" makes me wanna vote for B.

Grant permissions to the installation directory - This pertains to file or folder permissions, and it could be relevant if the software needs specific rights to execute or access files in its own directory. The case study makes reference to apps not files or folders in a directory. Therefor, ANSWER=B. Attach the external hardware token

You can grant to user, but that requires administrator to go in and out of permissions and groups for every change function that requires. Creating a group permission would be the most efficient means from a logical only security access perspective, but still requires administrator to change/automate permissions respectively. Having a hardware token is useful for giving quick physical access for a user to run a software if needed. You would want to use a ticketing system to keep track of users who have that hardware token.

This is a problem with authorization. A token is the only thing listed that has to do with authorization. Therefore B

The Correct answer here is A because the apps need permission to run and will not perform the needed functions if the permissions are not granted.

If the technician is allowed to install applications, then he most likely has administrator privileges already. He should therefore be able to run it without granting permissions. Thoughts?

B wouldn't resolve the issue. A would.

My choice is A too.

I think the answer is A