Universal Containers (UC) has a custom Apex class that enforces a business process and updates opportunities. UC has noticed that fields with field-level security permission of read only on certain users’ profiles are being updates by this class.
How should the architect fix this problem?
To ensure that fields with field-level security permission of read-only on certain users’ profiles are not being updated by the custom Apex class, the correct approach is to use the isUpdateable() Apex method. This method checks if a user has edit/update access to a field, allowing the code to conditionally perform updates only when the user has the necessary permissions. Other methods like WITH SECURITY_ENFORCED in SOQL statements enforce read access but do not verify edit access, and the With Sharing keywords deal with record-level access instead of field-level security.
the answer should be C, as a SOQL with WITH SECURITY_ENFORCED will still execute correctly and verifies Read access for Field and Object, not Edit access.
answer should be C https://developer.salesforce.com/docs/atlas.en-us.apexcode.meta/apexcode/apex_classes_with_security_enforced.htm
isUpdateable can be used on fields to check if a user has edit/update access to that field. WITH SECURITY_ENFORCED is just for soql retrieving records & with sharing keywords have to do with record level access and not field or object level access.
Answer should be C.
The answer should be C
A and C both are the ways to achieve this. With C, we can have graceful handling of access error while with A, it throws an exception causing any further transaction termination.
Should be C. The isUpdatetable allow to control access in edition of a field, while the A will trigger an error only if the field is not visible to the user