A sales rep at Universal Containers (UC) has manually shared an Opportunity record with
internal pre-sales users. After some time, the sales rep moved to another position and all opportunities records that were owned were transferred to a new sales rep. What happened to the internal pre-sales users access to the opportunity?
A sales rep (John) at Universal Containers (UC) requested to update information in an
account record where he has READ only access. John requested the EDIT access permission
from the owner of the record (Paul). Paul manually shared the record with John. Assuming the
OWD of the Account object is Public Read-Only, what is the impact in the system?
What vulnerability can exist when controllers use dynamic rather than static queries and bind variables?
Universal Container is a global Telco that has recently implemented enterprise territory management to better align their sales teams and sales processes. They are in Q4 of the FY and they have completely revamped their territory structure and created a plan for a new structure that would support the new FY. Their current territory model has 8k territories. Their new model would be a new set of 8,5K territories, and their org limit is 10k. What enterprise territory management feature can US take advantage of in order to help them stay within their org limits?
The sales managers at the Universal Containers (UC) requested their teams to define each user's role
on their accounts in order to provide an easy way to establish accountability and collaboration. Sales
managers also requested that sales associates should only get the following permissions:
Read access to the accounts.
Read access to cases related to the accounts
No access to deals related to the accounts
The sales associates may be granted access to opportunities when needed.
Assuming the overall sharing model of the organization is private and no sharing rules are configured on
the account object. How can an Architect achieve these requirements?
