McAfee Secure

CNCF CKA Bundle

Exam Code: CKA

Exam Name Certified Kubernetes Administrator

Certification Provider: CNCF

Corresponding Certification: CKA

CNCF CKA Bundle $44.99
CKA Sample 1 CKA Sample 2 CKA Sample 3 CKA Sample 4 CKA Sample 5 CKA Sample 6 CKA Sample 7 CKA Sample 8 CKA Sample 9 CKA Sample 10

100% CNCF CKA Guaranteed Success With Testking Training Materials

Get Real CKA Exam Questions & Expert Verified Answers as Experienced on the Real Exam!

  • Questions & Answers

    CKA Questions & Answers

    58 Questions & Answers

    The ultimate exam preparation tool, Questions & Answers mirrors the actual CKA exam while allowing you to hone and measure every aspect of your test-taking ability.

  • CKA Video Course

    CKA Training Course

    138 Video Lectures

    CKA Video Course is developed by CNCF Professionals to help you pass the CKA exam.

    Description

    This course will improve your knowledge and skills required to pass Certified Kubernetes Administrator exam.
  • Study Guide

    CKA Study Guide

    268 PDF Pages

    Developed by industry experts, this 268-page guide spells out in painstaking detail all of the information you need to ace CKA exam.

Certified Kubernetes Administrator (CKA) Practice Tests

Satisfaction Guaranteed

Money Back Guarantee

Testking provides hassle-free money back guarantee with our products. That is because we have 100% trust in the abilities of our professional and experience product team, and our record is a proof of that.

99.6% PASS RATE
Total Cost: $194.97
Bundle Price: $149.98

Purchase Individually

  • Questions & Answers

    Questions & Answers

    58 Questions

    $124.99
  • CKA Video Course

    Training Course

    138 Video Lectures

    $39.99
  • Study Guide

    Study Guide

    268 PDF Pages

    $29.99

CNCF CKA Practice Test 54

Question 530

At Northstar finance, in an isolated training cluster during a scheduled maintenance rehearsal: Service invoice-svc in ledger uses the wrong targetPort; the application container is listening on 8080 and Service port must remain 80. Work only within the stated target and verify before declaring success. Which Kubernetes behavior best explains the required change or diagnosis?

  1. An Ingress resource declares HTTP host/path routing but requires an actual installed Ingress controller.
  2. The Service port is what clients connect to, while targetPort must reach the actual backend listener.
  3. Gateway API HTTPRoutes express matching and backend behavior while Gateway resources own compatible listeners.
  4. CoreDNS behavior is configured separately from Service definitions, and incorrect DNS plugins or cluster domain can break discovery cluster-wide.

Explanation

Correct Answer

B:

The Service port is what clients connect to, while targetPort must reach the actual backend listener. This explains the stated condition. The corresponding action is: Run kubectl -n ledger patch service invoice-svc --type=merge -p '{"spec":{"ports":[{"port":80,"targetPort":8080}]}}' for the lab's single-port Service. The direct acceptance evidence is: Run kubectl -n ledger describe service invoice-svc and perform a connection test to port 80.

Incorrect Answers

A:

This principle describes a separate cause: An Ingress resource declares HTTP host/path routing but requires an actual installed Ingress controller. The reported condition is governed by: The Service port is what clients connect to, while targetPort must reach the actual backend listener. The two mechanisms should not be conflated.

C:

The offered statement is true for this other mechanism: Gateway API HTTPRoutes express matching and backend behavior while Gateway resources own compatible listeners. It does not explain the facts described here, which follow from: The Service port is what clients connect to, while targetPort must reach the actual backend listener.

D:

This principle describes a separate cause: CoreDNS behavior is configured separately from Service definitions, and incorrect DNS plugins or cluster domain can break discovery cluster-wide. The reported condition is governed by: The Service port is what clients connect to, while targetPort must reach the actual backend listener. The two mechanisms should not be conflated.

Question 531

At Northstar finance, in an isolated training cluster during a scheduled maintenance rehearsal: Service invoice-svc in ledger uses the wrong targetPort; the application container is listening on 8080 and Service port must remain 80. Work only within the stated target and verify before declaring success. Which observation best verifies the requested outcome rather than an unrelated state?

  1. Run curl -fsS http://127.0.0.1:18080/healthz from another local shell while the tunnel is active.
  2. Run kubectl -n ledger describe ingress invoice-ingress and verify its TLS mapping, then perform a certificate-validating HTTPS test.
  3. Run kubectl -n ledger describe service invoice-svc and perform a connection test to port 80.
  4. Run kubectl -n ledger describe networkpolicy invoice-api-deny-egress and test expected blocked destinations.

Explanation

Correct Answer

C:

Run kubectl -n ledger describe service invoice-svc and perform a connection test to port 80. This validates the affected object or control path, rather than only showing a command completed. The underlying reason is: The Service port is what clients connect to, while targetPort must reach the actual backend listener. The intended action is: Run kubectl -n ledger patch service invoice-svc --type=merge -p '{"spec":{"ports":[{"port":80,"targetPort":8080}]}}' for the lab's single-port Service.

Incorrect Answers

A:

The alternative verifies a different condition: Port-forwarding creates a client-side tunnel to a selected backend and does not change the Service type or network exposure. The current case instead depends on: The Service port is what clients connect to, while targetPort must reach the actual backend listener. Confirm that “Run kubectl -n ledger describe service invoice-svc and perform a connection test to port 80”.

B:

That test belongs to another control with this basis: Ingress TLS termination relies on a controller and a referenced TLS Secret; updating a Service alone does not install certificates. In the current case, the governing reason is: The Service port is what clients connect to, while targetPort must reach the actual backend listener. The direct verification is “Run kubectl -n ledger describe service invoice-svc and perform a connection test to port 80”.

D:

The alternative verifies a different condition: An egress-isolating NetworkPolicy can block Pod outbound connections; DNS and required dependencies need explicit allowances. The current case instead depends on: The Service port is what clients connect to, while targetPort must reach the actual backend listener. Confirm that “Run kubectl -n ledger describe service invoice-svc and perform a connection test to port 80”.

Question 532

At Northstar finance, in an isolated training cluster during a scheduled maintenance rehearsal: Service invoice-svc in ledger uses the wrong targetPort; the application container is listening on 8080 and Service port must remain 80. Work only within the stated target and verify before declaring success. Which operational control most directly prevents this failure or configuration drift?

  1. Prefer short-lived diagnostic tunnels and avoid treating port-forward as a production ingress path.
  2. Test Service selectors against actual Pod template labels during deployments and renames.
  3. Audit controller capability and exposed service access policies before enabling public ingress.
  4. Check exposed Service port mappings against actual container listeners and named ports before releases.

Explanation

Correct Answer

D:

Check exposed Service port mappings against actual container listeners and named ports before releases. This reduces recurrence of the specific operational failure. It reinforces the action: Run kubectl -n ledger patch service invoice-svc --type=merge -p '{"spec":{"ports":[{"port":80,"targetPort":8080}]}}' for the lab's single-port Service. The relevant mechanism is: The Service port is what clients connect to, while targetPort must reach the actual backend listener.

Incorrect Answers

A:

That safeguard is relevant to: Port-forwarding creates a client-side tunnel to a selected backend and does not change the Service type or network exposure. The current failure instead follows from: The Service port is what clients connect to, while targetPort must reach the actual backend listener. Its prevention measure is “Check exposed Service port mappings against actual container listeners and named ports before releases”.

B:

This routine guards against another mechanism: Services select matching Pods; an unmatched selector can leave EndpointSlices without usable backends despite healthy Pods. The recurring exposure in the current case is: The Service port is what clients connect to, while targetPort must reach the actual backend listener. The matching preventive check is “Check exposed Service port mappings against actual container listeners and named ports before releases”.

C:

The suggested review tracks a different technical risk: LoadBalancer Services request external routing from a supported infrastructure controller; a bare cluster does not guarantee an external address. Here the sustained control must address: The Service port is what clients connect to, while targetPort must reach the actual backend listener. Choose “Check exposed Service port mappings against actual container listeners and named ports before releases”.

Question 533

At Horizon observability, in a disposable simulated environment during a monitored release window: Service metrics-svc in observability uses the wrong targetPort; the application container is listening on 3000 and Service port must remain 8080. Work only within the stated target and verify before declaring success. Which command or initial safe diagnostic step best addresses the stated lab task?

  1. Run kubectl -n observability run metrics-api-dns-test --image=busybox:1.36 --restart=Never --command -- nslookup metrics-svc.observability.svc.cluster.local and inspect the Pod logs.
  2. Run kubectl -n observability patch service metrics-svc --type=merge -p '{"spec":{"ports":[{"port":8080,"targetPort":3000}]}}' for the lab's single-port Service.
  3. Run kubectl -n observability apply -f ./gateway/metrics-api-route.yaml after confirming parentRefs, hostnames and backendRefs.
  4. Run kubectl -n kube-system get deploy coredns; kubectl -n kube-system get pods -l k8s-app=kube-dns.

Explanation

Correct Answer

B:

Run kubectl -n observability patch service metrics-svc --type=merge -p '{"spec":{"ports":[{"port":8080,"targetPort":3000}]}}' for the lab's single-port Service. This is the appropriate command-line action or first safe diagnostic. The technical reason is: The Service port is what clients connect to, while targetPort must reach the actual backend listener. Validate the result with: Run kubectl -n observability describe service metrics-svc and perform a connection test to port 8080. Execute changes only in an authorized disposable lab or after normal production change controls.

Incorrect Answers

A:

This alternative is a response to another technical cause: Cluster DNS should resolve Service names inside its configured domain; host-side DNS results do not prove in-cluster resolution. The reported case instead depends on: The Service port is what clients connect to, while targetPort must reach the actual backend listener. The action that directly addresses it is “Run kubectl -n observability patch service metrics-svc --type=merge -p '{"spec":{"ports":[{"port":8080,"targetPort":3000}]}}' for the lab's single-port Service”.

C:

The offered action targets: Gateway API HTTPRoutes express matching and backend behavior while Gateway resources own compatible listeners. The case facts point instead to: The Service port is what clients connect to, while targetPort must reach the actual backend listener. Implement “Run kubectl -n observability patch service metrics-svc --type=merge -p '{"spec":{"ports":[{"port":8080,"targetPort":3000}]}}' for the lab's single-port Service” to address that specific condition.

D:

This alternative is a response to another technical cause: DNS resolution may fail when CoreDNS replicas are unhealthy even when the requested Service and Pod endpoints exist. The reported case instead depends on: The Service port is what clients connect to, while targetPort must reach the actual backend listener. The action that directly addresses it is “Run kubectl -n observability patch service metrics-svc --type=merge -p '{"spec":{"ports":[{"port":8080,"targetPort":3000}]}}' for the lab's single-port Service”.

Question 534

At Horizon observability, in a disposable simulated environment during a monitored release window: Service metrics-svc in observability uses the wrong targetPort; the application container is listening on 3000 and Service port must remain 8080. Work only within the stated target and verify before declaring success. Which Kubernetes behavior best explains the required change or diagnosis?

  1. A ClusterIP Service provides stable in-cluster virtual addressing and directs traffic to selected ready Pod endpoints.
  2. A NodePort Service allocates a cluster-configured host port on each node while retaining its cluster IP routing.
  3. The Service port is what clients connect to, while targetPort must reach the actual backend listener.
  4. Port-forwarding creates a client-side tunnel to a selected backend and does not change the Service type or network exposure.

Explanation

Correct Answer

C:

The Service port is what clients connect to, while targetPort must reach the actual backend listener. This explains the stated condition. The corresponding action is: Run kubectl -n observability patch service metrics-svc --type=merge -p '{"spec":{"ports":[{"port":8080,"targetPort":3000}]}}' for the lab's single-port Service. The direct acceptance evidence is: Run kubectl -n observability describe service metrics-svc and perform a connection test to port 8080.

Incorrect Answers

A:

A ClusterIP Service provides stable in-cluster virtual addressing and directs traffic to selected ready Pod endpoints. That explanation applies to a different technical failure. Here the controlling principle is: The Service port is what clients connect to, while targetPort must reach the actual backend listener.

B:

The offered statement is true for this other mechanism: A NodePort Service allocates a cluster-configured host port on each node while retaining its cluster IP routing. It does not explain the facts described here, which follow from: The Service port is what clients connect to, while targetPort must reach the actual backend listener.

D:

Port-forwarding creates a client-side tunnel to a selected backend and does not change the Service type or network exposure. That explanation applies to a different technical failure. Here the controlling principle is: The Service port is what clients connect to, while targetPort must reach the actual backend listener.

Question 535

At Horizon observability, in a disposable simulated environment during a monitored release window: Service metrics-svc in observability uses the wrong targetPort; the application container is listening on 3000 and Service port must remain 8080. Work only within the stated target and verify before declaring success. Which observation best verifies the requested outcome rather than an unrelated state?

  1. Run positive and negative network connectivity tests from Pods with and without the trusted source label.
  2. Run kubectl -n observability describe networkpolicy metrics-api-deny-egress and test expected blocked destinations.
  3. Run kubectl -n ledger get service invoice-svc and inspect its EndpointSlices and port mapping.
  4. Run kubectl -n observability describe service metrics-svc and perform a connection test to port 8080.

Explanation

Correct Answer

D:

Run kubectl -n observability describe service metrics-svc and perform a connection test to port 8080. This validates the affected object or control path, rather than only showing a command completed. The underlying reason is: The Service port is what clients connect to, while targetPort must reach the actual backend listener. The intended action is: Run kubectl -n observability patch service metrics-svc --type=merge -p '{"spec":{"ports":[{"port":8080,"targetPort":3000}]}}' for the lab's single-port Service.

Incorrect Answers

A:

That test belongs to another control with this basis: An ingress rule with a podSelector selects source Pods in its own namespace unless combined with other peer selectors. In the current case, the governing reason is: The Service port is what clients connect to, while targetPort must reach the actual backend listener. The direct verification is “Run kubectl -n observability describe service metrics-svc and perform a connection test to port 8080”.

B:

This observation would test a different technical dependency: An egress-isolating NetworkPolicy can block Pod outbound connections; DNS and required dependencies need explicit allowances. The current issue is governed by: The Service port is what clients connect to, while targetPort must reach the actual backend listener. Its decisive check is “Run kubectl -n observability describe service metrics-svc and perform a connection test to port 8080”.

C:

The alternative verifies a different condition: A ClusterIP Service provides stable in-cluster virtual addressing and directs traffic to selected ready Pod endpoints. The current case instead depends on: The Service port is what clients connect to, while targetPort must reach the actual backend listener. Confirm that “Run kubectl -n observability describe service metrics-svc and perform a connection test to port 8080”.

Question 536

At Horizon observability, in a disposable simulated environment during a monitored release window: Service metrics-svc in observability uses the wrong targetPort; the application container is listening on 3000 and Service port must remain 8080. Work only within the stated target and verify before declaring success. Which operational control most directly prevents this failure or configuration drift?

  1. Check exposed Service port mappings against actual container listeners and named ports before releases.
  2. Include EndpointSlice and readiness checks in Service connectivity runbooks.
  3. Track TLS Secret renewal and enforce appropriate ingress-controller security policies.
  4. Review ingress class ownership and avoid exposing test applications outside intended environments.

Explanation

Correct Answer

A:

Check exposed Service port mappings against actual container listeners and named ports before releases. This reduces recurrence of the specific operational failure. It reinforces the action: Run kubectl -n observability patch service metrics-svc --type=merge -p '{"spec":{"ports":[{"port":8080,"targetPort":3000}]}}' for the lab's single-port Service. The relevant mechanism is: The Service port is what clients connect to, while targetPort must reach the actual backend listener.

Incorrect Answers

B:

The suggested review tracks a different technical risk: EndpointSlices represent Service backend addresses and readiness; Service existence alone does not prove endpoints exist. Here the sustained control must address: The Service port is what clients connect to, while targetPort must reach the actual backend listener. Choose “Check exposed Service port mappings against actual container listeners and named ports before releases”.

C:

That safeguard is relevant to: Ingress TLS termination relies on a controller and a referenced TLS Secret; updating a Service alone does not install certificates. The current failure instead follows from: The Service port is what clients connect to, while targetPort must reach the actual backend listener. Its prevention measure is “Check exposed Service port mappings against actual container listeners and named ports before releases”.

D:

This routine guards against another mechanism: An Ingress resource declares HTTP host/path routing but requires an actual installed Ingress controller. The recurring exposure in the current case is: The Service port is what clients connect to, while targetPort must reach the actual backend listener. The matching preventive check is “Check exposed Service port mappings against actual container listeners and named ports before releases”.

Question 537

At Pinecrest logistics, in a sandbox Kubernetes cluster during a recovery tabletop exercise: Service dispatch-svc in fulfillment uses the wrong targetPort; the application container is listening on 9000 and Service port must remain 9090. Work only within the stated target and verify before declaring success. Which command or initial safe diagnostic step best addresses the stated lab task?

  1. Run kubectl -n fulfillment port-forward service/dispatch-svc 18082:9090 in a temporary session.
  2. Run kubectl -n fulfillment apply -f ./policies/dispatch-api-peer.yaml after verifying podSelector rules match the source identity.
  3. Run kubectl -n fulfillment patch service dispatch-svc --type=merge -p '{"spec":{"ports":[{"port":9090,"targetPort":9000}]}}' for the lab's single-port Service.
  4. Run kubectl -n kube-system get configmap coredns -o yaml and review the Corefile.

Explanation

Correct Answer

C:

Run kubectl -n fulfillment patch service dispatch-svc --type=merge -p '{"spec":{"ports":[{"port":9090,"targetPort":9000}]}}' for the lab's single-port Service. This is the appropriate command-line action or first safe diagnostic. The technical reason is: The Service port is what clients connect to, while targetPort must reach the actual backend listener. Validate the result with: Run kubectl -n fulfillment describe service dispatch-svc and perform a connection test to port 9090. Execute changes only in an authorized disposable lab or after normal production change controls.

Incorrect Answers

A:

The proposed action belongs to the mechanism: Port-forwarding creates a client-side tunnel to a selected backend and does not change the Service type or network exposure. Here the stated fault follows a different mechanism: The Service port is what clients connect to, while targetPort must reach the actual backend listener. The corrective choice is “Run kubectl -n fulfillment patch service dispatch-svc --type=merge -p '{"spec":{"ports":[{"port":9090,"targetPort":9000}]}}' for the lab's single-port Service”.

B:

The offered action targets: An ingress rule with a podSelector selects source Pods in its own namespace unless combined with other peer selectors. The case facts point instead to: The Service port is what clients connect to, while targetPort must reach the actual backend listener. Implement “Run kubectl -n fulfillment patch service dispatch-svc --type=merge -p '{"spec":{"ports":[{"port":9090,"targetPort":9000}]}}' for the lab's single-port Service” to address that specific condition.

D:

The proposed action belongs to the mechanism: CoreDNS behavior is configured separately from Service definitions, and incorrect DNS plugins or cluster domain can break discovery cluster-wide. Here the stated fault follows a different mechanism: The Service port is what clients connect to, while targetPort must reach the actual backend listener. The corrective choice is “Run kubectl -n fulfillment patch service dispatch-svc --type=merge -p '{"spec":{"ports":[{"port":9090,"targetPort":9000}]}}' for the lab's single-port Service”.

Question 538

At Pinecrest logistics, in a sandbox Kubernetes cluster during a recovery tabletop exercise: Service dispatch-svc in fulfillment uses the wrong targetPort; the application container is listening on 9000 and Service port must remain 9090. Work only within the stated target and verify before declaring success. Which Kubernetes behavior best explains the required change or diagnosis?

  1. Services select matching Pods; an unmatched selector can leave EndpointSlices without usable backends despite healthy Pods.
  2. An Ingress resource declares HTTP host/path routing but requires an actual installed Ingress controller.
  3. Gateway API HTTPRoutes express matching and backend behavior while Gateway resources own compatible listeners.
  4. The Service port is what clients connect to, while targetPort must reach the actual backend listener.

Explanation

Correct Answer

D:

The Service port is what clients connect to, while targetPort must reach the actual backend listener. This explains the stated condition. The corresponding action is: Run kubectl -n fulfillment patch service dispatch-svc --type=merge -p '{"spec":{"ports":[{"port":9090,"targetPort":9000}]}}' for the lab's single-port Service. The direct acceptance evidence is: Run kubectl -n fulfillment describe service dispatch-svc and perform a connection test to port 9090.

Incorrect Answers

A:

The offered statement is true for this other mechanism: Services select matching Pods; an unmatched selector can leave EndpointSlices without usable backends despite healthy Pods. It does not explain the facts described here, which follow from: The Service port is what clients connect to, while targetPort must reach the actual backend listener.

B:

This principle describes a separate cause: An Ingress resource declares HTTP host/path routing but requires an actual installed Ingress controller. The reported condition is governed by: The Service port is what clients connect to, while targetPort must reach the actual backend listener. The two mechanisms should not be conflated.

C:

Gateway API HTTPRoutes express matching and backend behavior while Gateway resources own compatible listeners. That explanation applies to a different technical failure. Here the controlling principle is: The Service port is what clients connect to, while targetPort must reach the actual backend listener.

Question 539

At Pinecrest logistics, in a sandbox Kubernetes cluster during a recovery tabletop exercise: Service dispatch-svc in fulfillment uses the wrong targetPort; the application container is listening on 9000 and Service port must remain 9090. Work only within the stated target and verify before declaring success. Which observation best verifies the requested outcome rather than an unrelated state?

  1. Run kubectl -n fulfillment describe service dispatch-svc and perform a connection test to port 9090.
  2. Run kubectl -n fulfillment get gateway regional-gw -o yaml and inspect Accepted and Programmed conditions.
  3. Run kubectl -n fulfillment get service dispatch-svc -o wide and inspect the allocated node port and endpoints.
  4. Run an in-Pod nslookup dispatch-svc.fulfillment.svc.cluster.local and confirm name resolution under isolation.

Explanation

Correct Answer

A:

Run kubectl -n fulfillment describe service dispatch-svc and perform a connection test to port 9090. This validates the affected object or control path, rather than only showing a command completed. The underlying reason is: The Service port is what clients connect to, while targetPort must reach the actual backend listener. The intended action is: Run kubectl -n fulfillment patch service dispatch-svc --type=merge -p '{"spec":{"ports":[{"port":9090,"targetPort":9000}]}}' for the lab's single-port Service.

Incorrect Answers

B:

The alternative verifies a different condition: Gateway API separates infrastructure listener ownership from application route attachments and depends on controller support. The current case instead depends on: The Service port is what clients connect to, while targetPort must reach the actual backend listener. Confirm that “Run kubectl -n fulfillment describe service dispatch-svc and perform a connection test to port 9090”.

C:

That test belongs to another control with this basis: A NodePort Service allocates a cluster-configured host port on each node while retaining its cluster IP routing. In the current case, the governing reason is: The Service port is what clients connect to, while targetPort must reach the actual backend listener. The direct verification is “Run kubectl -n fulfillment describe service dispatch-svc and perform a connection test to port 9090”.

D:

This observation would test a different technical dependency: NetworkPolicy egress rules are additive and DNS lookup requires permitted traffic to the DNS server, not only a correct Service record. The current issue is governed by: The Service port is what clients connect to, while targetPort must reach the actual backend listener. Its decisive check is “Run kubectl -n fulfillment describe service dispatch-svc and perform a connection test to port 9090”.

Question 540

At Pinecrest logistics, in a sandbox Kubernetes cluster during a recovery tabletop exercise: Service dispatch-svc in fulfillment uses the wrong targetPort; the application container is listening on 9000 and Service port must remain 9090. Work only within the stated target and verify before declaring success. Which operational control most directly prevents this failure or configuration drift?

  1. Model required system egress and incident recovery before enforcing default-deny behavior.
  2. Check exposed Service port mappings against actual container listeners and named ports before releases.
  3. Test security policies from allowed and denied sources rather than trusting YAML alone.
  4. Track TLS Secret renewal and enforce appropriate ingress-controller security policies.

Explanation

Correct Answer

B:

Check exposed Service port mappings against actual container listeners and named ports before releases. This reduces recurrence of the specific operational failure. It reinforces the action: Run kubectl -n fulfillment patch service dispatch-svc --type=merge -p '{"spec":{"ports":[{"port":9090,"targetPort":9000}]}}' for the lab's single-port Service. The relevant mechanism is: The Service port is what clients connect to, while targetPort must reach the actual backend listener.

Incorrect Answers

A:

The suggested review tracks a different technical risk: An egress-isolating NetworkPolicy can block Pod outbound connections; DNS and required dependencies need explicit allowances. Here the sustained control must address: The Service port is what clients connect to, while targetPort must reach the actual backend listener. Choose “Check exposed Service port mappings against actual container listeners and named ports before releases”.

C:

This routine guards against another mechanism: A selecting NetworkPolicy with ingress isolation and no allow rules denies new ingress to selected Pods except protocol-specific policy behavior; it does not itself control egress. The recurring exposure in the current case is: The Service port is what clients connect to, while targetPort must reach the actual backend listener. The matching preventive check is “Check exposed Service port mappings against actual container listeners and named ports before releases”.

D:

The suggested review tracks a different technical risk: Ingress TLS termination relies on a controller and a referenced TLS Secret; updating a Service alone does not install certificates. Here the sustained control must address: The Service port is what clients connect to, while targetPort must reach the actual backend listener. Choose “Check exposed Service port mappings against actual container listeners and named ports before releases”.