A company's DevOps group builds applications in AWS CodeBuild using NPM open-source packages from public registries. The company wants to host those NPM packages in private registries and perform validation on new package versions before the DevOps team starts using them. Which approach satisfies these requirements with the least operational overhead?

The correct approach leverages AWS CodeArtifact, a fully managed artifact repository service, to host private NPM packages and manage upstream public registries. Configuring an npm-store upstream repository allows CodeArtifact to fetch packages from public sources. By pointing the build process to CodeArtifact, the company centralizes package management. A CodePipeline can then automate validation checks on new package versions within CodeArtifact. Marking a failed package as unlisted prevents its use, ensuring only validated versions are available. This solution minimizes operational overhead because CodeArtifact handles repository management, scaling, and security without requiring manual infrastructure setup. Incorrect options: S3 caching in CodeBuild is for build artifacts, not for managing and validating external package dependencies. Using CodeCommit for each library is operationally intensive, requiring manual package copying and maintenance of numerous repositories, and doesn't provide the specialized features of a package manager. The second CodeCommit option also involves high operational overhead and doesn't offer the dedicated package management and validation features of CodeArtifact.