A media company stores finished video masters in a public cloud object store. Legal requires that each object be retrievable even if a single facility is destroyed, and that any silent data corruption be detectable years later. The storage team wants the provider to handle replication and integrity verification without application changes. Which capability should the team verify is available from the provider?
Cross-region replication copies objects to geographically separate facilities, satisfying the facility-loss requirement, while checksum-based validation such as content-MD5 or provider-side integrity hashing detects bit rot and silent corruption over time. Both are provider-managed and require no application modification, matching every stated constraint for the archived video masters.
Why this answer
The legal requirements combine geographic durability with long-term corruption detection. Cross-region replication addresses facility loss, and checksum-based integrity validation catches silent bit-level corruption, both delivered by the provider without application changes. The other capabilities address confidentiality, version history, or authorization, none of which replicate data or verify integrity.
Exam trap
The trap here is treating any data-protection feature such as versioning or encryption as equivalent to durability, when facility-loss survival and corruption detection require replication plus checksum validation.