* Platform Encryption: Salesforce Platform Shield Encryption ensures that specific fields in records are encrypted at rest and during transit, aligning with privacy and security policies.
* Why Option C is Correct:
* Updating the encryption policy for new fields (Billing Street, Billing City, and Phone) ensures compliance with the privacy team's requirements.
* Contacting Salesforce to encrypt existing records ensures that legacy data is also encrypted. By default, only new or updated records are encrypted when encryption is applied.
* Why Others Are Incorrect:
* Option A: Classic Encryption is outdated and not designed for structured field-level encryption with Platform Shield.
* Option B: Waiting for an email notification does not ensure that existing records are encrypted.
For detailed reference, see Salesforce Platform Encryption documentation: https://help.salesforce.com/

If a field disappears from the Account page, the likely cause is that its visibility has been restricted through Field-Level Security (FLS) or a related profile/permission set update. Using Field Accessibility in Object Manager allows the admin to review and troubleshoot field permissions across profiles.
* Option A: A "Who Sees What" report is used for record visibility, not field visibility.
* Option B: Logging in as a user might help confirm the issue but doesn't provide insights into why the field is missing.
* Option C (Correct): Field Accessibility offers a comprehensive view of field-level security for troubleshooting.
References:
* Field Accessibility

With a private organization-wide default (OWD) model for the Account object, users do not have automatic access to related records they do not own. However, Salesforce provides implicit sharing, which ensures that the owner of a child record, such as an Opportunity, is granted Read access to the related parent Account. This implicit sharing does not extend to Edit or Create permissions unless additional sharing rules, roles, or explicit access mechanisms are configured. Therefore, the sales rep will have Read access to the Account associated with their owned Opportunities. (developer.salesforce.com)

For Customer Community licenses, the most optimal and Salesforce-recommended method to share cases with users is through a Sharing Set. Sharing Sets allow administrators to grant access to records associated with the user's account or contact, based on their profile and account relationship.
* Option A: Apex sharing could accomplish this, but it is unnecessary overhead and more complex compared to Sharing Sets, especially for straightforward account-related sharing.
* Option B: Sharing rules do not apply to community licenses such as Customer Community and are not an effective solution in this context.
* Option C (Correct): Sharing Sets provide a declarative solution to meet the requirement. By configuring a Sharing Set, UC can grant students access to cases linked to their account without needing custom code or complex configurations.
References:
* Sharing Sets for Communities

* Mobile-Specific Customization: Salesforce allows overriding standard actions like "Edit" with custom Lightning components that are conditionally applied for mobile or desktop experiences.
* Why Option A is Correct:
* Overriding the "Edit" action for the mobile view only allows field consultants to use the image capture functionality without affecting desktop users' experience.
* This aligns with the requirement to minimize customization while leveraging reusable Lightning Components.
* Why Others Are Incorrect:
* Option B: Overriding for all devices and detecting form factors adds unnecessary complexity and could confuse desktop users.
* Option C: Adding a separate "Edit in Mobile" button complicates the user interface and training process.
For detailed implementation guidelines, see Salesforce Lightning Component Customization: https://help.
salesforce.com/