Currently our singleton application including 5 containers goes through AWS pipeline into code build and then code deploy into ECS services. During codebuild base on an ENV set in codebuild $Stage it can be dev, prod or staging and loads a specific config file for which contains all the ENV variables each container needs. See below:
build:
commands:
#Get commit id
- "echo STAGE $STAGE"
- "export STAGE=$STAGE"
#Assigning AWS_ACCESS_KEY_ID and AWS_SECRET_ACCESS_KEY needs to be done in two steps, otherwise it ends up in "Partial credentials found in env" error
- "export ANSIBLE_VARS=\"\
USE_EXISTING_VPC=true \
DISABLE_BASIC_AUTH=true\""
- "export DOCKER_ARGS=\"-e COMMIT_ID=$GIT_COMMIT -e APP_ENV=$STAGE
Problem 1: is these config files are within the repo and anybody can modify them. So there are lots of human errors like the production redirect Url is pointing to the wrong place, or new ENV is not set.
So I want to move away from loading different config files and move ENV variables to AWS to handle. Something like during code build it will load from parameter store. Is this correct way?
Problem 2 is there are lots of ENV variables, is the only option to list them one by one in the CloudFormation template ? Are there any other better way to load all of ENV variable into DOCKER_ARG from above build command ?
When I tried to push a container image to the Container Registry, it gave me the following error,
denied: Token exchange failed for project 'my-proj-123'. Caller does not have permission 'storage.buckets.create'. To configure permissions, follow instructions at: https://cloud.google.com/container-registry/docs/access-control
I had to follow the Bucket Name Verification process to be able to create the artifacts.my-proj-123.appspot.com bucket. Now when I try to push the docker image, it does not complain on storage.buckets.create permission but only gives:
denied: Access denied.
I don't know which user I need to give access to. I gave Storage Admin access to the Compute Engine default service account to no avail. How can I fix it?
I was able to push a Docker image to Container Registry from a Container Optimized OS.
If you are having permission problems, I recommend you to give the Compute Engine default service account at least project editor permissions, just for testing purposes. Even if you just target Cloud Storage, other parts of the processes may need more permissions. Once you finish testing, you can create a new service account with less permissions and fine tune it for your needs.
Also, there is an alternative to gcloud for authentication. You can try by following this:
First try to download docker-credential-gcr with:
VERSION=1.5.0
OS=linux # or "darwin" for OSX, "windows" for Windows.
ARCH=amd64 # or "386" for 32-bit OSs
curl -fsSL "https://github.com/GoogleCloudPlatform/docker-credential-gcr/releases/download/v${VERSION}/docker-credential-gcr_${OS}_${ARCH}-${VERSION}.tar.gz" \
| tar xz --to-stdout ./docker-credential-gcr \
> /usr/bin/docker-credential-gcr && chmod +x /usr/bin/docker-credential-gcr
After that execute docker-credential-gcr configure-docker
Download the Compute Engine default service account json key.
Execute cat [your_service_account_credentials.json] | docker login -u _json_key --password-stdin https://[HOSTNAME]
I hit the similar issue while i was trying to upload the docker image to GCR from container optimized OS, i ran the following sequence of command,
Created a service account and assigned Storage Admin privileges.
Downloaded the JSON key
Executed docker-credential-gcr configure-docker
Logged in with docker command - docker login -u _json_key -p "$(cat ./mygcrserviceaccount.JSON)" https://gcr.io
Tried pushing the image gcr - docker push gcr.io/project-id/imagename:tage01
It failed with following error,
denied: Token exchange failed for project 'project-id'. Caller does not have permission 'storage.buckets.create'. To configure permissions, follow instructions at: https://cloud.google.com/container-registry/docs/access-control
I tried giving every possible permission to my service account through IAM role but it would fail with same error.
After reading this issue i did the following changes,
Removed the docker config directory rm -rf ~/.docker
Executed docker-credential-gcr configure-docker
Stored the JSON key into variable named GOOGLE_APPLICATION_CREDENTIALS
GOOGLE_APPLICATION_CREDENTIALS=/path/to/mygcrserviceaccount.JSON
Logged in with docker command - docker login -u _json_key -p "$(cat ${GOOGLE_APPLICATION_CREDENTIALS})" https://gcr.io
Executed docker push command - docker push gcr.io/project-id/imagename:tage01
Voila, it worked like a charm!
In the newly created google container builder I am unable to fetch git tags during a build. During the build process the default cloning does not seem to fetch git tags. I added a custom build process which calls git fetch --tags but this results in the error:
Fetching origin
git: 'credential-gcloud.sh' is not a git command. See 'git --help'.
fatal: could not read Username for 'https://source.developers.google.com': No such device or address
# cloudbuild.yaml
#!/bin/bash
openssl aes-256-cbc -k "$ENC_TOKEN" -in gcr_env_vars.sh.enc -out gcr_env_vars.sh -
source gcr_env_vars.sh
env
git config --global url.https://${CI_USER_TOKEN}#github.com/.insteadOf git#github.com:
pushd vendor
git submodule update --init --recursive
popd
docker build -t gcr.io/project-compute/continuous-deploy/project-ui:$COMMIT_SHA -f /workspace/installer/docker/ui/Dockerfile .
docker build -t gcr.io/project-compute/continuous-deploy/project-auth:$COMMIT_SHA -f /workspace/installer/docker/auth/Dockerfile .
This worked for me, as the first build step:
- name: gcr.io/cloud-builders/git
args: [fetch, --depth=100]
To be clear, you want all tags to be available in the Git repo, not just to trigger on tag changes? In the latter, the triggering tag should be available IIUC.
I'll defer to someone on the Container Builder team for a more detailed explanation, but that error tells me that they used gcloud to clone the Google Cloud Source Repository (GCSR), which configures a Git credential helper named as such. They likely did this in another container before invoking yours, or on the host. Since gcloud and/or the gcloud credential helper aren't available in your container, you can't authenticate properly with GCSR.
You can learn a bit more about the credential helper here.
So, i'm trying not to put sensitive information on the dockerfile. A logical approach is to put the creds in the ebs configuration (the GUI) as a ENV variable. However, docker build doesn't seem to be able to access the ENV variable. Any thoughts?
FROM jupyter/scipy-notebook
USER root
ARG AWS_ACCESS_KEY_ID
RUN echo {$AWS_ACCESS_KEY_ID}
I assume that for every deployment you create a new Dockerrun.aws.json file with the correct docker image tag for that deployment. At deployment stage, you can inject environment values which will then be used in docker run command by EB agent. So your docker containers can now access to these environment variables.
Putting sensitive information (for a Dockerfile to use) can be either for allowing a specific step of the image to run (build time), or for the resulting image to have that secret still there at runtime.
For runtime, if you can use the latest docker 1.13 in a swarm mode configuration, you can manage secrets that way
But the first case (build time) is typically for passing credentials to an http_proxy, and that can be done with --build-arg:
docker build --build-arg HTTP_PROXY=http://...
This flag allows you to pass the build-time variables that are accessed like regular environment variables in the RUN instruction of the Dockerfile.
Also, these values don’t persist in the intermediate or final images like ENV values do.
In that case, you would not use ENV, but ARG:
ARG <name>[=<default value>]
The ARG instruction defines a variable that users can pass at build-time to the builder with the docker build command using the --build-arg <varname>=<value> flag
I am running docker-container on Amazon EC2. Currently I have added AWS Credentials to Dockerfile. Could you please let me know the best way to do this?
A lot has changed in Docker since this question was asked, so here's an attempt at an updated answer.
First, specifically with AWS credentials on containers already running inside of the cloud, using IAM roles as Vor suggests is a really good option. If you can do that, then add one more plus one to his answer and skip the rest of this.
Once you start running things outside of the cloud, or have a different type of secret, there are two key places that I recommend against storing secrets:
Environment variables: when these are defined on a container, every process inside the container has access to them, they are visible via /proc, apps may dump their environment to stdout where it gets stored in the logs, and most importantly, they appear in clear text when you inspect the container.
In the image itself: images often get pushed to registries where many users have pull access, sometimes without any credentials required to pull the image. Even if you delete the secret from one layer, the image can be disassembled with common Linux utilities like tar and the secret can be found from the step where it was first added to the image.
So what other options are there for secrets in Docker containers?
Option A: If you need this secret only during the build of your image, cannot use the secret before the build starts, and do not have access to BuildKit yet, then a multi-stage build is a best of the bad options. You would add the secret to the initial stages of the build, use it there, and then copy the output of that stage without the secret to your release stage, and only push that release stage to the registry servers. This secret is still in the image cache on the build server, so I tend to use this only as a last resort.
Option B: Also during build time, if you can use BuildKit which was released in 18.09, there are currently experimental features to allow the injection of secrets as a volume mount for a single RUN line. That mount does not get written to the image layers, so you can access the secret during build without worrying it will be pushed to a public registry server. The resulting Dockerfile looks like:
# syntax = docker/dockerfile:experimental
FROM python:3
RUN pip install awscli
RUN --mount=type=secret,id=aws,target=/root/.aws/credentials aws s3 cp s3://... ...
And you build it with a command in 18.09 or newer like:
DOCKER_BUILDKIT=1 docker build -t your_image --secret id=aws,src=$HOME/.aws/credentials .
Option C: At runtime on a single node, without Swarm Mode or other orchestration, you can mount the credentials as a read only volume. Access to this credential requires the same access that you would have outside of docker to the same credentials file, so it's no better or worse than the scenario without docker. Most importantly, the contents of this file should not be visible when you inspect the container, view the logs, or push the image to a registry server, since the volume is outside of that in every scenario. This does require that you copy your credentials on the docker host, separate from the deploy of the container. (Note, anyone with the ability to run containers on that host can view your credential since access to the docker API is root on the host and root can view the files of any user. If you don't trust users with root on the host, then don't give them docker API access.)
For a docker run, this looks like:
docker run -v $HOME/.aws/credentials:/home/app/.aws/credentials:ro your_image
Or for a compose file, you'd have:
version: '3'
services:
app:
image: your_image
volumes:
- $HOME/.aws/credentials:/home/app/.aws/credentials:ro
Option D: With orchestration tools like Swarm Mode and Kubernetes, we now have secrets support that's better than a volume. With Swarm Mode, the file is encrypted on the manager filesystem (though the decryption key is often there too, allowing the manager to be restarted without an admin entering a decrypt key). More importantly, the secret is only sent to the workers that need the secret (running a container with that secret), it is only stored in memory on the worker, never disk, and it is injected as a file into the container with a tmpfs mount. Users on the host outside of swarm cannot mount that secret directly into their own container, however, with open access to the docker API, they could extract the secret from a running container on the node, so again, limit who has this access to the API. From compose, this secret injection looks like:
version: '3.7'
secrets:
aws_creds:
external: true
services:
app:
image: your_image
secrets:
- source: aws_creds
target: /home/user/.aws/credentials
uid: '1000'
gid: '1000'
mode: 0700
You turn on swarm mode with docker swarm init for a single node, then follow the directions for adding additional nodes. You can create the secret externally with docker secret create aws_creds $HOME/.aws/credentials. And you deploy the compose file with docker stack deploy -c docker-compose.yml stack_name.
I often version my secrets using a script from: https://github.com/sudo-bmitch/docker-config-update
Option E: Other tools exist to manage secrets, and my favorite is Vault because it gives the ability to create time limited secrets that automatically expire. Every application then gets its own set of tokens to request secrets, and those tokens give them the ability to request those time limited secrets for as long as they can reach the vault server. That reduces the risk if a secret is ever taken out of your network since it will either not work or be quick to expire. The functionality specific to AWS for Vault is documented at https://www.vaultproject.io/docs/secrets/aws/index.html
The best way is to use IAM Role and do not deal with credentials at all. (see http://docs.aws.amazon.com/AWSEC2/latest/UserGuide/iam-roles-for-amazon-ec2.html )
Credentials could be retrieved from http://169.254.169.254..... Since this is a private ip address, it could be accessible only from EC2 instances.
All modern AWS client libraries "know" how to fetch, refresh and use credentials from there. So in most cases you don't even need to know about it. Just run ec2 with correct IAM role and you good to go.
As an option you can pass them at the runtime as environment variables ( i.e docker run -e AWS_ACCESS_KEY_ID=xyz -e AWS_SECRET_ACCESS_KEY=aaa myimage)
You can access these environment variables by running printenv at the terminal.
Yet another approach is to create temporary read-only volume in docker-compose.yaml. AWS CLI and SDK (like boto3 or AWS SDK for Java etc.) are looking for default profile in ~/.aws/credentials file.
If you want to use other profiles, you just need also to export AWS_PROFILE variable before running docker-compose command.
export AWS_PROFILE=some_other_profile_name
version: '3'
services:
service-name:
image: docker-image-name:latest
environment:
- AWS_PROFILE=${AWS_PROFILE}
volumes:
- ~/.aws/:/root/.aws:ro
In this example, I used root user on docker. If you are using other user, just change /root/.aws to user home directory.
:ro - stands for read-only docker volume
It is very helpful when you have multiple profiles in ~/.aws/credentials file and you are also using MFA. Also helpful when you want to locally test docker-container before deploying it on ECS on which you have IAM Roles, but locally you don't.
Another approach is to pass the keys from the host machine to the docker container. You may add the following lines to the docker-compose file.
services:
web:
build: .
environment:
- AWS_ACCESS_KEY_ID=${AWS_ACCESS_KEY_ID}
- AWS_SECRET_ACCESS_KEY=${AWS_SECRET_ACCESS_KEY}
- AWS_DEFAULT_REGION=${AWS_DEFAULT_REGION}
The following one-liner works for me even when my credentials are set up by aws-okta or saml2aws:
$ docker run -v$HOME/.aws:/root/.aws:ro \
-e AWS_ACCESS_KEY_ID \
-e AWS_CA_BUNDLE \
-e AWS_CLI_FILE_ENCODING \
-e AWS_CONFIG_FILE \
-e AWS_DEFAULT_OUTPUT \
-e AWS_DEFAULT_REGION \
-e AWS_PAGER \
-e AWS_PROFILE \
-e AWS_ROLE_SESSION_NAME \
-e AWS_SECRET_ACCESS_KEY \
-e AWS_SESSION_TOKEN \
-e AWS_SHARED_CREDENTIALS_FILE \
-e AWS_STS_REGIONAL_ENDPOINTS \
amazon/aws-cli s3 ls
Please note that for advanced use cases you might need to allow rw (read-write) permissions, so omit the ro (read-only) limitation when mounting the .aws volume in -v$HOME/.aws:/root/.aws:ro
Volume mounting is noted in this thread but as of docker-compose v3.2 + you can Bind Mount.
For example, if you have a file named .aws_creds in the root of your project:
In your service for the compose file do this for volumes:
volumes:
# normal volume mount, already shown in thread
- ./.aws_creds:/root/.aws/credentials
# way 2, note this requires docker-compose v 3.2+
- type: bind
source: .aws_creds # from local
target: /root/.aws/credentials # to the container location
Using this idea, you can publicly store your docker images on docker-hub because your aws credentials will not physically be in the image...to have them associated, you must have the correct directory structure locally where the container is started (i.e. pulling from Git)
You could create ~/aws_env_creds containing:
touch ~/aws_env_creds
chmod 777 ~/aws_env_creds
vi ~/aws_env_creds
Add these value (replace the key of yours):
AWS_ACCESS_KEY_ID=AK_FAKE_KEY_88RD3PNY
AWS_SECRET_ACCESS_KEY=BividQsWW_FAKE_KEY_MuB5VAAsQNJtSxQQyDY2C
Press "esc" to save the file.
Run and test the container:
my_service:
build: .
image: my_image
env_file:
- ~/aws_env_creds
If someone still face the same issue after following the instructions mentioned in accepted answer then make sure that you are not passing environment variables from two different sources. In my case I was passing environment variables to docker run via a file and as parameters which was causing the variables passed as parameters show no effect.
So the following command did not work for me:
docker run --env-file ./env.list -e AWS_ACCESS_KEY_ID=ABCD -e AWS_SECRET_ACCESS_KEY=PQRST IMAGE_NAME:v1.0.1
Moving the aws credentials into the mentioned env.list file helped.
for php apache docker the following command works
docker run --rm -d -p 80:80 --name my-apache-php-app -v "$PWD":/var/www/html -v ~/.aws:/.aws --env AWS_PROFILE=mfa php:7.2-apache
Based on some of previous answers, I built my own as follows.
My project structure:
├── Dockerfile
├── code
│ └── main.py
├── credentials
├── docker-compose.yml
└── requirements.txt
My docker-compose.yml file:
version: "3"
services:
app:
build:
context: .
volumes:
- ./credentials:/root/.aws/credentials
- ./code:/home/app
My Docker file:
FROM python:3.8-alpine
RUN pip3 --no-cache-dir install --upgrade awscli
RUN mkdir /app
WORKDIR /home/app
CMD python main.py