The correct option is Allows operators to pick different storage and networking implementations and avoid vendor lock in.

A plugin model defines stable, well documented interfaces such as CSI, CNI, and SMI so that multiple vendors and projects can implement compatible drivers and controllers. This separation of interface and implementation lets operators choose the best implementation for their needs and replace one provider with another without changing workloads or core Kubernetes behavior.

Creates vendor lock in so clusters can only use supported providers is incorrect because the whole point of a plugin API is to prevent vendor lock in by enabling many implementations to coexist and be swapped.

Makes it necessary to use managed cloud services such as GKE add ons for proper plugin operation is incorrect because plugins can run in any conformant Kubernetes cluster and are not inherently tied to managed cloud add ons. Managed services may provide convenience but they are not required.

Adds communication overhead between plugins and backends which can increase request latency is incorrect as a general statement because well designed plugins use efficient RPCs and the interface itself does not impose prohibitive latency. Specific implementations may have overhead depending on architecture but that is not a reason to reject the plugin model.

Full AWS Practitioner Certification Question