We have a lot of systems which have their own authorization mechanisms. Our goal is to expose all of them through IS so we can manage all of them in a single place.
Our users are authenticated in LDAP but their roles are spread through several databases. As far as I can see IS retrieves roles from the domain the user was authenticated. Is it possible to retrieve roles from all user stores ignoring the domain?
I've already tried both RemoteUserStoreManagerService.getRoleListOfUser and using claim http://wso2.org/claims/role.
In WSO2 you can only assign roles to user if roles are in the same user store domain where the user belongs. If the role is an internal role, then you can assign that role to any users in any user stores.
What is the API Service you tried to retrieve roles? and Please explain more about your requirements.
Thanks
Isura
Related
I have my enterprise Quicksight in place and with users using our company email to register an account (like john.doe#mycompany.com). We're using Gmail for business.
On the other hand we have developed another application backed by AWS Cognito user pool using Google as an identity provider, and since this is the same user base our intention was to use the same user pool for Quicksight access. In addition we will develop a Lambda that would synchronize Cognito user group association with Quicksight memberships if/when necessary.
I've followed the example described here https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/big-data/use-amazon-quicksight-federated-single-sign-on-with-amazon-cognito-user-pools/, but the problem is that even though I login as different users I get access to Quicksight via same IAM role. The Quicksight user associated with this role has a specific username starting with CognitoQuickSight1-AuthRole-KX4Y16... and email associated with the user I used to login the very first time.
Now I'm wondering if in this setup it's even possible to have different roles associated with different users so they can be differentiated on Quicksight side? Or is there any other way to achieve this?
I don't think you can assign QuickSight user specific permission on Federated users.
Some AWS services allows to use the user identity in the resource base IAM policy. For example S3 (to allow user to access only their 'directory' in a bucket) and DynamoBD (to allow user to only access item where their identity is the primary key).
According to https://docs.aws.amazon.com/quicksight/latest/user/security_iam_service-with-iam.html Quicksight does not support Resource based or Tag based policies.
At my employer, we have an AWS account that uses SAML 2.0 to federate in your user access from the company SSO login to the AWS console. The net effect is that everyone has admin access. Is there a way to place federated users into different IAM groups, thereby giving least privilege access?
The answer we came up with is that all federated users would have very limited access to the console with no programmatic access. Then, create separate IAM users for everyone for programmatic access (no console login) and to place these separate users into IAM groups with varying access. Would this method be considered best practice or is there a better way to accomplish what we would like to do in this case?
The best practices is to use groups to set permissions (policies) for each class of user.
Grant users SSO access to AWS accounts in your organization by
selecting the AWS accounts from a list populated by AWS SSO, and then
selecting users or groups from your directory and the permissions you
want to grant them.
AWS Single Sign-On
Your SSO SAML 2.0 provider should be able to pass role information to AWS at sign-in. You can then have corresponding IAM roles setup in AWS.
We use Azure AD for SSO and set it up using this example: https://blog.flux7.com/aws-best-practice-azure-ad-saml-authentication-configuration-for-aws-console
Basically you create Azure AD Security Groups and map them to IAM roles.
Our organization has set up WSO2 API Manager 2.1, with a secondary user store binding to our organization's LDAP. We need all users from our organization to have a subscriber role by default.
We would prefer for there to be no need for users to use "Self Sign Up"-- and additionally, "Self Sign Up" appears to create new accounts, however all of our accounts are already in the secondary user store.
How can we configure the system to grant the subscriber role by default?
Is there any common ldap user group for the users? For example users who need to log in to the store belongs to X group. If so, you could assign subscriber related permissions for that group from API manager instead of assigning permissions to the 'everyone' role. (If you have configured the groups related ldap queries correctly you should be able to view them in the API manager carbon console. refer https://docs.wso2.com/display/IS550/Configuring+a+Read-write+LDAP+User+Store)
I'm trying to build a web app that can be accessed by any user that signs up with facebook.
I want to use AWS Cognito to speed up the development for users management.
It has to have 3 type of users:
Normal users - any user that logs in with facebook
Editors - users that have a different access level (IAM role?), they can call a specific AWS Lambda function, that normal users can't call.
Administrators - users that can modify the status of normal users to make them editors or admins
Can someone please point me in the right direction? I've set up AWS Cognito Identity Pool but I'm not sure if I have to set up a User Pool or how do I assign a different role or policy to a user to make him an admin or editor (different access levels for other AWS resources), if I can get in my web app the users list from Cognito (only for an authenticated admin) and how do I allow him to modify other users roles.
Some tutorial, documentation or at least a short description of how can I do this would help me a lot.
Optional: let users to not only sign up with facebook but also with email/pass, and have the same functionality.
You should be able to use 'Role Based Access Control' feature of Cognito federated identities. This is the relevant part of the doc:
http://docs.aws.amazon.com/cognito/latest/developerguide/role-based-access-control.html
If you are only using Facebook, you can use Facebook sub to assign appropriate role.
If you are using username and password based sign-in with user pool, you can use group support and create editors group and assign appropriate permissions.
Instead of managing Administrators with federated identities or user pool, probably directly using IAM user will be a better idea. This IAM user will have full permission to modify/add identity pool rules or user pool groups.
I'm attempting to develop an application architecture almost exclusively on top of AWS services.
This application has both User and Organization "entities". As one might except, a User may be an admin, role-x or role-y of one or more organizations. (role-x and role-y are just placeholders for some role with some set of specific permissions. A User may also be standalone (that is, not have a role on any Organization).
Our current thinking is to use DynamoDB to store organization and user specific data. For users this may include some basic information (address, phone number, whatever), and for organizations it may include fields like "mission statement", "business address" and so on.
An admin of an organization would be able to edit all organization fields, whereas a role-x might only be able to update "mission statement" while reading all other fields.
Since I mentioned that a single user may have roles on many different organizations, that might look something like:
user1:
organizations:
123: 'admin'
456: 'role-x'
789: 'admin'
It's also worth noting that these role assignments are modifiable. New or existing users may be invited to take on a specific role for an organization, and an organization may remove a user from a role.
This is a fairly straightforward type of layout, but I wanted to be very clear about the many-to-many nature of the user, org and roles.
I've been reading IAM and Cognito documentation, as well as how it relates to fine-grained control over DynamoDB items or S3 buckets - but many of the examples focus on a single user accessing their own data rather than a many-to-many role style layout.
How might one go about implementing this type of permission system on AWS?
(If policy definitions need to be updated with specific Identities (say, for an Organization), can that reliably be done in a programatic way - or is it ill-advised to modify policies on the fly like that?)
The above answer is outdated.
AWS has added Cognito-Groups recently. That provides more flexibility
You can use technique described in the article to achieve that:
https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/aws/new-amazon-cognito-groups-and-fine-grained-role-based-access-control-2/
Unfortunately the kind of permission system you are trying to implement is not possible with Cognito at the moment. With Cognito you can currently create unique identities for your users in an identity pool. Users can authenticate using any external provider such as Facebook, Amazon, Google, Twitter/Digits or any OpenId Connect Provider. Users can also authenticate through your own backend authentication process. After the user authenticates, Cognito creates a unique identity for that user. There’s a concept of an identity, but there’s no concept of groups. All users/identities within a one identity pool can get credentials from roles associated with that identity pool. Currently you can specify two roles: One role for authenticated identity and one role for unauthenticated identity. There’s no such feature at the moment where you can specify multiple groups for each identity and specify role on that group.
For more information on Cognito, you can refer to
https://aws.amazon.com/cognito/faqs/
http://docs.aws.amazon.com/cognito/devguide/getting-started/