S3 Cross account Access | Accessing Buckets via console of another Account - amazon-web-services

I have created the Roles and policies according to the AWS document for the S3 cross account access and I'm able to list all the buckets and do stuff only using command Line.
I need all the buckets in Account 'A' to Account 'B' and buckets from Account 'A' should be visible in the Account 'B' S3 Console.
Is there a way for the Account 'A' buckets to appear in Account 'B' console?

You can switching to a role in AWS console. However, the use of console requires more permissions then just barely listing S3 buckets, thus you may find that you may need to add more permissions to your cross-account role.

Related

AWS S3 bucket policy: permissions based on account id prefix

I have a centralized CloudTrail bucket which contains the CloudTrail logs of multiple accounts. Is it possible to write a bucket policy which allows that account 123456789112 can only download logs from Awslogs/123456789112 and that account 456789012345can only download logs from Awslogs/456789012345etc ? I don't want to hardcode this for each account since I have a lot of accounts. Is there a way to do this?
AWS IAM policies (and bucket policies) support a few policy variables that you can use as dynamic values such as aws:SourceIp, however account ID is not one of them. There is a aws:userid variable but it's the account ID only for the root user, for other principals like IAM user/role it is the user/role name. Technically if you used the AWS root user to access this bucket, you could use the userid variable in the Resource element to achieve what you want but it is strongly recommended not to use the root user for such everyday tasks (AWS recommendation).
There are also policy condition keys like aws:PrincipalAccount but without a relevant policy variable these cannot be used to dynamically compare the requesting account ID with the resource. There are no other IAM feature that could be used to achieve this.
I don't know your exact environment but a few things to consider:
I'd recommend to explicitly list the allowed principal ARNs anyway because even if you have many accounts, you should allow only specific IAM users/roles to read the bucket to follow the least privilege principle. Granting access based on account ID would allow all users/roles in that account to read these files and not just specific services. (unless this is the objective)
since this is a cross-account access (principal in account A wants to read from the bucket located in account B), you will need to allow this access on both sides, both in the requester's IAM policy and the target bucket's policy. Just a heads up. More info on AWS.
I would consider using Terraform to simplify the management of these resources
Hope this helps, let me know if you have more questions!

I am a AWS IAM user and I have created a bucket, and I want no other IAM users to access my bucket. How can I achieve it

I am a AWS IAM user having "S3FullPermissions". I have created a bucket, and I want no other IAM users to access my buckets. How can I achieve it. Please help me with bucket policy..
S3 buckets and their objects are by default private. No one has access to them unless given explicit permissions to do so. So if you are the only one with S3 buckets permissions, no other IAM user will be able to access your buckets and objects.

How do you create an ARN that specifies all S3 buckets in a specific account?

I'm tasked with creating an IAM policy in AWS which grants a user access to all s3 objects in all s3 buckets within a specific account.
However, because s3 bucket names are globally unique, and there being no region or account element in an s3 ARN, it would appear that there's no way to grant access to all s3 objects in one specific account. I must grant it either to specific buckets, or all buckets in all accounts. Is that true? There must be a work around.
I want something like:  
"Resource": "arn:aws:s3::<accountid>:*"
not:  
"Resource": "arn:aws:s3:::*"
Anyone see any solution? I did already read this other related discussion
You can add conditions to S3 resource policies, one of them is s3:ResourceAccount which should allow you to use the ARN arn:aws:s3:::* but still restrict access to only buckets in your account.
https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/storage/limit-access-to-amazon-s3-buckets-owned-by-specific-aws-accounts/

GCS limit bucket access to an existing service account

Usually there is Compute Engine default service account that is created automatically by GCP, this account is used for example by VM agents to access different resources across GCP and by default has role/editor permissions.
Suppose I want to create GCS bucket that can only be accessed by this default service account and no one else. I've looked into ACLs and tried to add an ACL to the bucket with this default service account email but it didn't really work.
I realized that I can still access bucket and objects in this bucket from other accounts that have for example storage bucket read and storage object read permissions and I'm not sure what I did wrong (maybe some default ACLs are present?).
My questions are:
Is it possible to limit access to just that default account? In that case who will not be able to access it?
What would be the best way to do it? (would appreciate a lot an example using Storage API)
There are still roles such as role/StorageAdmin, and actually no matter what ACLs will be put on the bucket I could still access it if I had this role (or higher role such as owner) right?
Thanks!
I recommend you not to use ACL (and Google also). It's better to switch the bucket in uniform IAM policy.
There are 2 bad side of ACL:
New created files aren't ACL and you need to set it everytime that you create a ne file
It's difficult to know who has and who hasn't access with ACL. IAM service is better for auditing.
When you switch to Uniform IAM access, Owner, Viewer, and Editor role no longer have access to buckets (the role/storage.admin isn't included in this primitive role). It could solve in one click all the unwanted access. Else, as John said, remove all the IAM permission on the bucket and the project that have access to the bucket except your service account.
You can control access to buckets and objects using Cloud IAM and ACLs.
For example grant the service account WRITE (R: READ,W: WRITE,O: OWNER) access to the bucket using ACLs:
gsutil acl ch -u service-account#project.iam.gserviceaccount.com:W gs://my-bucket
To remove access of service account from the bucket:
gsutil acl ch -d service-account#project.iam.gserviceaccount.com gs://my-bucket
If There are roles such as role/StorageAdmin in the IAM identities (project level), they will have access to all the GCS resources of the project. You might have to change the permission to avoid them having access.

Aws IAM Roles vs Bucket Policies

I have been reading a number of docs and watched number of videos, but I am still very confused about IAM Roles and Bucket policies. Here is what confuses me:
1) I create a bucket. At that time I can make it public or keep it private. If I make it public, then anyone, or any Application, can "see" the objects in the bucket. I think the permissions can be set to add/delete/get/list objects in the bucket. If this is the case, then why do I ever need to add any IAM Role for S3 buckets, or, add any Bucket policy (???)
2) At the time I create a bucket, can I give very specific permissions to only certain users/applications/EC2 instances etc to all or part of the bucket? e.g. App1 on EC2-X can access subfolder A in bucket B1.
3) Coming to IAM Roles, an EC2 role that gives full S3 access- what does it mean? Full access to any bucket? How can I restrict an app running on an EC2 to only certain buckets, with only certain restricted permissions (see #2) above)? Do all Apps on the EC2 have full access to all buckets? At the time of creating a bucket, can the permissions be so set that an IAM Role can be overruled?
4) Finally, what do Bucket Policies do in addition to the above IAM Roles? e.g is 'AllowS3FullAccess' a "Bucket Policy", or an "IAM Policy"? Why differentiate between types of policies- policies are just that- they define some permissions/rules on some objects/resources,as I see it.
Thanks for any clarifications.
- a newcomer to AWS
I think you are confusing permissions for resources with IAM entities.
i) There are resources (S3 bucket, EC2 instances etc.) owned by the AWS account and these resources can be accessed by IAM users, IAM roles or other AWS Services (can be from same or different account)
ii) We manage who can access and their permission level with policies
iii) Policies can be identity based (attached to IAM user/group/role) or resource based (attached to S3 bucket, SNS topic)
iv) Resource based policy will have a Principal element but the identity based policies will not have that (because the attached IAM entity is the Principal)
v) Permissions start from default deny, allow overrides the default deny and an explicit deny overrides any allow
vi) Final access will be determined by combination of all policies
To answer your questions:
1> We cannot add (or attach) an IAM role with an S3 bucket. If you want your bucket should be public (which is not recommended but need to do it till some extent if it's in use for static website), then you can keep it public
2> It is not possible while creating the bucket. You have to do it after creating the bucket via IAM and/or S3 bucket policy
3> If an IAM role has AmazonS3FullAccess, the role can (Effect:Allow) call any S3 API (s3:) for any S3 resource (Resource:) in your account (provided they don't have cross account access).
If multiple applications run on an instance with an IAM role attached and are using credentials provided by the role, their permission will be same.
4> I don't know where you got the reference AllowS3FullAccess but we cannot confirm unless we know the exact JSON. If it is attached to a bucket or has the Principal element, it is a bucket policy.
You can use IAM and Bucket policies based on your need. Usually bucket policies are used for cross account access or if you want to manage S3 permission policies in a single place.