I am trying to create an IAM Managed Policy to assign to QA users that will give them readonly access to a specific DBCluster, the QA cluster.
So far I haven't been able to limit the access to the specific cluster, I can only get it to work if the Resource tag is set to all
"PolicyDocument": {
"Version": "2012-10-17",
"Statement": [
{
"Action": [
"rds:Describe*",
"rds:ListTagsForResource"
],
"Resource": "*",
"Effect": "Allow",
"Sid": "DescribeQADatabase"
}
]
}
I've tried changing the Resource tag to my specific DBCluster ARN, but when I do that nothing shows in the RDS page in the AWS Console
Side question, if I look at the AWS Provided AmazonRDSReadOnlyAccess I see that it gives access to a bunch of other AWS Resources like ec2 instances. Is there a document/resource I can use that will basically tell me all the dependencies I will need if I want to give access to a specific resource?
Related
I have a "root" account.
I created an "admin" account which has all the right.
I created an account "dev" and I want it to only have acces to certain services:
s3
dynamoDB
cloudWatch
API Gateway
Lambda
Cognito
So I created a policy with the aws console editor and I gave full access to theses ressources and allows everything, it gave me this:
{
"Version": "2012-10-17",
"Statement": [
{
"Sid": "VisualEditor0",
"Effect": "Allow",
"Action": [
"s3:*",
"apigateway:*",
"lambda:*",
"dynamodb:*",
"cognito-idp:*"
],
"Resource": "*"
}
]
}
Looks good to me (not specific enough but good for a beginner).
Problem: I created db, lambda, api gateway, etc... but I can't see the services with this, which autorisation should I give for the "dev" role to see the items in the AWS console ?
I found it, I only needed to switch my region in the top right corner of the console. (shame on me)
I'm currently spinning in circles trying to restore from an AWS Backup and am running into permissions errors. I have administrator access to my AWS account. I've tried creating a new policy and attach it to my user account in IAM as follows:
The issue I can't seem to get around is that I need to add the permission iam:PassRole but I can't seem to find it anywhere within the AWS portal. How can I add this permission to my policy?!
EDIT: I've created a policy with all backup permissions allowed and including iam:PassRole however I am still receiving the error message You are not authorized to perform this operation. when trying to perform the backup. The policy I've created and attached to my user looks as follows:
{
"Version": "2012-10-17",
"Statement": [
{
"Sid": "VisualEditor0",
"Effect": "Allow",
"Action": [
"backup:*",
"iam:PassRole",
"iam:GetRole"
],
"Resource": "*"
}
]
}
“To successfully do a restore with the original instance profile, you will need to make changes to the restore policy. If you apply instance profile during the restore, you must update the operator role and add PassRole permissions of the underlying instance profile role to EC2. Otherwise, Amazon EC2 won’t be able to authorize the instance launch and it will fail.”
Here is the policy you can attach to the AWS default Backup role “AWSBackupDefaultServiceRole” to work around this issue:
{
"Version": "2012–10–17",
"Statement": [
{
"Sid": "VisualEditor0",
"Effect": "Allow",
"Action": "iam:PassRole",
"Resource": "arn:aws:iam::<Account-ID>:role/*"
}]}
Source: https://medium.com/contino-engineering/new-aws-backup-features-for-quick-and-easy-ec2-instance-recovery-c8887365ca6a
I'm trying to create some infrastructure for a service I am building on AWS using AWS Fargate. I'm using SSM as a value store for some of my application configuration, so I need both the regular permissions for Fargate as well as additional permissions for SSM. However, after banging my head against this particular wall for a while, I've come to the conclusion that I just don't understand AWS IAM in general or this problem in particular, so I'm here for help.
The basis of my IAM code comes from this tutorial; the IAM code is actually not in that tutorial but rather in this file in the github repo linked to that tutorial. I presume I need to retain that STS permission for something although I'm not entirely sure what.
I've converted the IAM code from the tutorial into a JSON document because I find JSON easier to work with than the Terraform native thing. Here's what I've come up with. It doesn't work. I would like to know why it doesn't work and how to fix it. Please ELI5 (explain like I'm 5 years old) because I know nothing about this.
{
"Version": "2012-10-17",
"Statement": [
{
"Effect": "Allow",
"Action": [
"ssm:GetParameters",
"secretsmanager:GetSecretValue",
"kms:Decrypt",
"sts:AssumeRole"
],
"Principal": {
"Service": ["ecs-tasks.amazonaws.com"]
}
}
]
}
At a minimum, your ECS task should have below permissions:
Ability to assume a role
Resource level permissions
In the example, you have referred, An IAM Role is created with the following:
A trust relationship is attached. <-- To enable ECS task to assume an IAM role
AWS managed policy AmazonECSTaskExecutionRolePolicy is attached. <-- Resource permissions
So, in order to retrieve the SSM parameter values, add below resource permissions.
{
"Version": "2012-10-17",
"Statement": [
{
"Effect": "Allow",
"Action": [
"ssm:Describe*",
"ssm:Get*",
"ssm:List*"
],
"Resource": [
"arn:aws:ssm:*:*:parameter/{your-path-hierarchy-to-parameter}/*"
]
}
]
}
If your Secrets uses KMS, then grant necessary kms permissions (kms:Decrypt). Refer specifying-sensitive-data for reference.
In our environment, all IAM user accounts are assigned a customer-managed policy that grants read-only access to a lot of AWS services. Here's what I want to do:
Migrate a sql server 2012 express database from on-prem to a RDS instance
Limit access to the S3 bucket containing the database files
Here's the requirements according to AWS:
A S3 bucket to store the .bak database file
A role with access to the bucket
SQLSERVER_BACKUP_RESTORE option attached to RDS instance
So far, I've done the following:
Created a bucket under the name "test-bucket" (and uploaded the .bak file here)
Created a role under the name "rds-s3-role"
Created a policy under the name "rds-s3-policy" with these settings:
{
"Version": "2012-10-17",
"Statement": [
{
"Effect": "Allow",
"Action": [
"s3:ListBucket",
"s3:GetBucketLocation"
],
"Resource": "arn:aws:s3:::test-bucket/"
},
{
"Effect": "Allow",
"Action": [
"s3:GetObjectMetaData",
"s3:GetObject",
"s3:PutObject",
"s3:ListMultipartUploadParts",
"s3:AbortMultipartUpload"
],
"Resource": "arn:aws:s3:::test-bucket/*"
}
]
}
Assigned the policy to the role
Gave the AssumeRole permissions to the RDS service to assume the role created above
Created a new option group in RDS with the SQLSERVER_BACKUP_RESTORE option and linked it to my RDS instance
With no restrictions on my S3 bucket, I can perform the restore just fine; however, I can't find a solid way of restricting access to the bucket without hindering the RDS service from doing the restore.
In terms of my attempts to restrict access to the S3 bucket, I found a few posts online recommending using an explicit Deny statement to deny access to all types of principals and grant access based on some conditional statements.
Here's the contents of my bucket policy:
{
"Version": "2012-10-17",
"Id": "Policy1486769843194",
"Statement": [
{
"Sid": "Stmt1486769841856",
"Effect": "Deny",
"Principal": "*",
"Action": "s3:*",
"Resource": [
"arn:aws:s3:::test-bucket",
"arn:aws:s3:::test-bucket/*"
],
"Condition": {
"StringNotLike": {
"aws:userid": [
"<root_id>",
"<user1_userid>",
"<user2_userid>",
"<user3_userid>",
"<role_roleid>:*"
]
}
}
}
]
}
I can confirm the bucket policy does restrict access to only the IAM users that I specified, but I am not sure how it treats IAM roles. I used the :* syntax above per a document I found on the aws forums where the author stated the ":*" is a catch-all for every principal that assumes the specified role.
The only thing I'm having a problem with is, with this bucket policy in place, when I attempt to do the database restore, I get an access denied error. Has anyone ever done something like this? I've been going at it all day and haven't been able to find a working solution.
The following, admittedly, is guesswork... but reading between the lines of the somewhat difficult to navigate IAM documentation and elsewhere, and taking into account the way I originally interpreted it (incorrectly), I suspect that you are using the role's name rather than the role's ID in the policy.
Role IDs look similar to AWSAccessKeyIds except that they begin with AROA....
For the given role, find RoleId in the output from this:
$ aws iam get-role --role-name ROLE-NAME
https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/security/how-to-restrict-amazon-s3-bucket-access-to-a-specific-iam-role/
Use caution when creating a broad Deny policy. You can end up denying s3:PutBucketPolicy to yourself, which leaves you in a situation where your policy prevents you from changing the policy... in which case, your only recourse is presumably to persuade AWS support to remove the bucket policy. A safer configuration would be to use this to deny only the object-level permissions.
I am looking to lock down an S3 bucket for security purposes - i'm storing deployment images in the bucket.
What I want to do is create a bucket policy that supports anonymous downloads over http only from EC2 instances in my account.
Is there a way to do this?
An example of a policy that I'm trying to use (it won't allow itself to be applied):
{
"Statement": [
{
"Effect": "Allow",
"Principal": {
"AWS": "*"
},
"Action": "s3:GetObject",
"Resource": "arn:aws:s3:::[my bucket name]",
"Condition": {
"ArnEquals": {
"aws:SourceArn": "arn:aws:ec2:us-east-1:[my account id]:instance/*"
}
}
}
]
}
Just to clarify how this is normally done. You create a IAM policy, attach it to a new or existing role, and decorate the ec2 instance with the role. You can also provide access through bucket policies, but that is less precise.
Details below:
S3 buckets are default deny except for my the owner. So you create your bucket and upload the data. You can verify with a browser that the files are not accessible by trying https://s3.amazonaws.com/MyBucketName/file.ext. Should come back with error code "Access Denied" in the xml. If you get an error code of "NoSuchBucket", you have the url wrong.
Create an IAM policy based on arn:aws:iam::aws:policy/AmazonS3ReadOnlyAccess. Starts out looking like the snip below. Take a look at the "Resource" key, and note that it is set to a wild card. You just modify this to be the arn of your bucket. You have to do one for the bucket and its contents so it becomes: "Resource": ["arn:aws:s3:::MyBucketName", "arn:aws:s3:::MyBucketName/*"]
Now that you have a policy, what you want to do is to decorate your instances with a IAM Role that automatically grants it this policy. All without any authentication keys having to be in the instance. So go to Role, create new role, make an Amazon EC2 role, find the policy you just created, and your Role is ready.
Finally you create your instance, and add the IAM role you just created. If the machine already has its own role, you just have to merge the two roles into a new one for the machine. If the machine is already running, it wont get the new role until you restart.
Now you should be good to go. The machine has the rights to access the s3 share. Now you can use the following command to copy files to your instance. Note you have to specify the region
aws s3 cp --region us-east-1 s3://MyBucketName/MyFileName.tgz /home/ubuntu
Please Note, the term "Security through obscurity" is only a thing in the movies. Either something is provably secure, or it is insecure.
I used something like
{
"Version": "2012-10-17",
"Id": "Allow only My VPC",
"Statement": [
{
"Sid": "Allow only My VPC",
"Effect": "Allow",
"Principal": "*",
"Action": "s3:GetObject", "s3:ListBucket",
"Resource": [
"arn::s3:::{BUCKET_NAME}",
"arn::s3:::{BUCKET_NAME}/*"
],
"Condition": {
"StringLike": {
"aws:sourceVpc": "{VPC_ID}" OR "aws:sourceVpce": "{VPCe_ENDPOINT}"
}
}
}
]
}