New changes proposal on question 170, 168 and 164

[boldrack]

Question 164;

I think there's a mistake in the option. The current option ticks

Create a new identity pool, enable access to authenticated identities, and grant access to AWS resources

which looks right except that it ought to be "unauthenticated" instead of authenticated. The question state it needs to provide access to guest users. keyword GUEST users so UNAUTHENTICATED access must be enabled for this to work .

[boldrack]

Question 168 ;

The answer ought to be

Create a usage plan for each user and request API keys to access the APIs

The question stated that the company is in SLA with all its users, Given the context, This means each users has different request for performance and resources. while considering that only the above proposed option checks out.

Further more, This gives control at the individual consumer level, which is what SLAs typically require.

[boldrack]

Question 170;

Current selected answer is - Amazon Cognito user pools.

it seem wrong, it should be - Amazon Cognito Identity pools

The question stated the application is to support SAML and Facebook authentication. These are services provided by identity pools not user pools. user pools only supports user management and login, it's not capable of federation or even providing access to aws services. even itself needs identity pool for that.

Identity pool allows login with SAML and Facebook via Federated Identity, can also provide access to AWS services such as Dynamo DB as the question requested.

[danieldanielecki]

Wasn't supposed #39 (comment) be the last change proposal? :)

Let me know if you expect more changes!

[boldrack]

It's like i sta

Wasn't supposed #39 (comment) be the last change proposal? :)

Let me know if you expect more changes!

It's like I stated before. I go through the questions on a daily schedule and I only send out the proposed changes as i walk through it.

You can just leave it open, so that way, if there's any more, they all pile in here and you can merge it all at once.

[danieldanielecki]

It's okay; I've reviewed it and merged - it's was x3 correct.

For the next ones, submit another PR, please :)