200-901 Infrastructure and Automation Practice Question
A DevOps team uses a CI/CD pipeline to deploy network configurations. They want to ensure that only authorized network engineers can trigger changes to production devices. Which integration is most appropriate?
⚠ Common exam trap
Test-takers frequently confuse technical controls (like encryption or syntax validation) with authorization controls, assuming that protecting secrets or validating code is equivalent to restricting who can trigger a deployment.
Answer choices
Why each option matters
Answer the question above first, then reveal the full breakdown to understand why each option is right or wrong.
Correct answer & explanation
✓
Implement Role-Based Access Control (RBAC) on the CI/CD tool
Role-Based Access Control (RBAC) on the CI/CD tool directly restricts which users or groups can trigger pipeline jobs that modify production network devices. This ensures that only authorized network engineers have the permissions to execute changes, aligning with the principle of least privilege in deployment pipelines.
Answer analysis
Option-by-option breakdown
For each option: why learners choose it and why it is or isn't the right answer here.
- ✗
Encrypt the Ansible vault password
Why it's wrong here
Encrypting the vault password protects secrets at rest, not who may initiate a production change; authorisation requires an identity-aware approval gate, such as pipeline service connections with role assignments. Vault encryption is the right control when the concern is safeguarding credentials in source control.
- ✓
Implement Role-Based Access Control (RBAC) on the CI/CD tool
Why this is correct
RBAC on the CI/CD tool restricts pipeline trigger permissions to authorised network engineers, directly enforcing the stated constraint that only those users may initiate production changes. It governs who can execute the deployment rather than how configurations are validated or approved.
- ✗
Use a separate staging environment
Why it's wrong here
A separate staging environment tests configurations before production but grants no authorisation control over who can trigger a production change. It is tempting because staging reduces deployment risk, and would be correct when the goal is validating configurations rather than restricting which engineers may approve and release them.
- ✗
Use a pre-commit hook in Git to validate YAML syntax
Why it's wrong here
A pre-commit hook validates YAML syntax locally before code is committed; it enforces formatting, not the identity or authorisation of who may trigger production changes. It is tempting because hooks catch errors early, and would be correct when the requirement is preventing malformed configuration from entering the repository.
Quick reference
Access Control Model Comparison
| Model | Acronym | Who Controls Access? | Best For |
|---|---|---|---|
| Discretionary Access Control | DAC | Resource owner | Small teams, file shares |
| Mandatory Access Control | MAC | System / security labels | Classified govt / military |
| Role-Based Access Control | RBAC | Administrator (via roles) | Enterprise environments |
| Attribute-Based Access Control | ABAC | Policy engine (user + resource attributes) | Fine-grained, dynamic policies |
| Rule-Based Access Control | RuBAC | System rules / ACLs | Firewall rules, network ACLs |
Go deeper
Related to this question
About these practice questions
This 200-901 question is part of Courseiva's 975-question bank — original exam-style content with full explanations and wrong-answer analysis, never real exam questions or exam dumps. Learn why practice questions differ from exam dumps →
JA
Written by Johnson Ajibi, MSc IT Security
Senior Network & Security Engineer · founder of Courseiva
This 200-901 practice question is part of Courseiva's free Cisco certification practice question bank. Courseiva provides original exam-style practice questions with explanations, topic-based practice, mock exams, readiness tracking, and study analytics to help learners prepare for the 200-901 exam.