Mulesoft MCPA-Level-1 Exam Questions

JSON threat protection

Explanation: Explanation
Correct Answer: JSON threat protection
*****************************************
Fact: Technically, there are no restrictions on what policy can be applied in what layer. Any
policy can be applied on any layer API. However, context should also be considered
properly before blindly applying the policies on APIs.
That is why, this question asked for a policy that would LEAST likely be applied to a
Process API.
From the given options:
>> All policies except "JSON threat protection" can be applied without hesitation to the
APIs in Process tier.
>> JSON threat protection policy ideally fits for experience APIs to prevent suspicious
JSON payload coming from external API clients. This covers more of a security aspect by
trying to avoid possibly malicious and harmful JSON payloads from external clients calling
experience APIs.
As external API clients are NEVER allowed to call Process APIs directly and also these
kind of malicious and harmful JSON payloads are always stopped at experience API layer
only using this policy, it is LEAST LIKELY that this same policy is again applied on Process
Layer API.

8082

Explanation: Explanation
Correct Answer: 8082
*****************************************
>> 8091 and 8092 ports are to be used when keeping your HTTP and HTTPS app private
to the LOCAL VPC respectively.
>> Above TWO ports are not for Shared AWS VPC/ Shared Worker Cloud.
>> 8081 is to be used when exposing your HTTP endpoint app to the internet through
Shared LB
>> 8082 is to be used when exposing your HTTPS endpoint app to the internet through
Shared LB
So, API invocations should be sent to port 8082 when calling this HTTPS based app.
References:
https://docs.mulesoft.com/runtime-manager/cloudhub-networking-guide
https://help.mulesoft.com/s/article/Configure-Cloudhub-Application-to-Send-a-HTTPSRequest-
Directly-to-Another-Cloudhub-Application
https://help.mulesoft.com/s/question/0D52T00004mXXULSA4/multiple-http-listerners-oncloudhub-
one-with-port-9090

SLA-based rate limiting

Explanation: Explanation
Correct Answer: SLA-based rate limiting
*****************************************
>> Client Id enforement policy is a "Compliance" related NFR and does not help in
maintaining the "Quality of Service (QoS)". It CANNOT and NOT meant for protecting the
backend systems from scalability challenges.
>> IP Whitelisting and OAuth 2.0 token enforcement are "Security" related NFRs and again
does not help in maintaining the "Quality of Service (QoS)". They CANNOT and are NOT
meant for protecting the backend systems from scalability challenges.
Rate Limiting, Rate Limiting-SLA, Throttling, Spike Control are the policies that are "Quality
of Service (QOS)" related NFRs and are meant to help in protecting the backend systems
from getting overloaded.
https://dzone.com/articles/how-to-secure-apis

Explanation:
In MuleSoft’s ecosystem, when a Process API needs to consume a System API (published to Exchange and protected by OAuth 2.0), the recommended approach is to utilize the REST Connect Connector. Here’s how it aligns with best practices:

• Automated Connector Generation:
• Streamlined Integration:
• Why Option C is Correct:
• Explanation of Incorrect Options:

1. Decrease the IT delivery gap
2. Meet various business demands without increasing the IT capacity
3. Make consumption of assets at the rate of production

Explanation: Explanation
Correct Answer:
1. Decrease the IT delivery gap
2. Meet various business demands without increasing the IT capacity
3. Make consumption of assets at the rate of production.
*****************************************
Reference: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U0FpYMnMjmM

When a pragmatic approach with only limited isolation from the backend system is deemed appropriate

Explanation: Explanation
Correct Answer: When a pragmatic approach with only limited isolation from the backend
system is deemed appropriate.
*****************************************
General guidance w.r.t choosing Data Models:
>> If an Enterprise Data Model is in use then the API data model of System APIs should
make use of data types from that Enterprise Data Model and the corresponding API
implementation should translate between these data types from the Enterprise Data Model
and the native data model of the backend system.
>> If no Enterprise Data Model is in use then each System API should be assigned to a
Bounded Context, the API data model of System APIs should make use of data types from
the corresponding Bounded Context Data Model and the corresponding API
implementation should translate between these data types from the Bounded Context Data
Model and the native data model of the backend system. In this scenario, the data types in
the Bounded Context Data Model are defined purely in terms of their business
characteristics and are typically not related to the native data model of the backend system.
In other words, the translation effort may be significant.
>> If no Enterprise Data Model is in use, and the definition of a clean Bounded Context
Data Model is considered too much effort, then the API data model of System APIs should
make use of data types that approximately mirror those from the backend system, same
semantics and naming as backend system, lightly sanitized, expose all fields needed for
the given System API’s functionality, but not significantly more and making good use of
REST conventions.
The latter approach, i.e., exposing in System APIs an API data model that basically mirrors
that of the backend system, does not provide satisfactory isolation from backend systems
through the System API tier on its own. In particular, it will typically not be possible to
"swap out" a backend system without significantly changing all System APIs in front of that
backend system and therefore the API implementations of all Process APIs that depend on
those System APIs! This is so because it is not desirable to prolong the life of a previous
backend system’s data model in the form of the API data model of System APIs that now
front a new backend system. The API data models of System APIs following this approach
must therefore change when the backend system is replaced.
On the other hand:
>> It is a very pragmatic approach that adds comparatively little overhead over accessing
the backend system directly
>> Isolates API clients from intricacies of the backend system outside the data model
(protocol, authentication, connection pooling, network address, …)
>> Allows the usual API policies to be applied to System APIs
>> Makes the API data model for interacting with the backend system explicit and visible,
by exposing it in the RAML definitions of the System APIs
>> Further isolation from the backend system data model does occur in the API

API Design and Development, API Runtime Execution and Hosting, API Operations and
Management, API Consumer Engagement

Explanation: Explanation
Correct Answer: API Design and Development, API Runtime Execution and Hosting, API
Operations and Management, API Consumer Engagement
*****************************************
>> API Design and Development - Anypoint Studio, Anypoint Design Center, Anypoint
Connectors
>> API Runtime Execution and Hosting - Mule Runtimes, CloudHub, Runtime Services
>> API Operations and Management - Anypoint API Manager, Anypoint Exchange
>> API Consumer Management - API Contracts, Public Portals, Anypoint Exchange, API
Notebooks