----------------- | NO | | SECRETS | | IN | | ENVIRONMENT | | VARIABLES | ------------------ (\__/) || (•ㅅ•) || / づ
-
-
Master secrets in a tmpfs mount seems...non-ideal
-
Basically, I've seen enough Rails path traversal bugs to want to shy away from having any secrets accessible via a filesystem
- Još 3 druga odgovora
Novi razgovor -
-
-
Or, depending on circumstances, an appropriate OS keychain. However all of my endeavors doing this in Linux have ended in folly... nice on macOS w\ Keychain Services thoughhttps://twitter.com/esesci/status/1166567971147452419 …
-
Is the idea here that it would be less likely for a secret obtained by the application in this
way to show up in logs/etc? If the host is compromised, you at least have an audit trail in KMS, but it won't save your bacon from compromise - Još 2 druga odgovora
Novi razgovor -
-
-
How would a restricted metadata service work in a container scenario as you only have one IAM role per EC2 instance?
-
A metadata service proxy. There are a million of 'em. Most of them are confused deputies. That's ok, so is the metadata service.
- Još 2 druga odgovora
Novi razgovor -
-
-
Also the master secret should ideally be one-time use. Startup, exchange one-time bootstrap token for real credentials. (Eg can do this with Hashicorp Vault or with OAuth auth codes).
-
Yep, it should be a short-lived credential to access the secret store
Kraj razgovora
Novi razgovor -
-
-
I'd love to dig deeper into this. Could you link us to any good resource addressing those issues? Thank you
Hvala. Twitter će to iskoristiti za poboljšanje vaše vremenske crte. PoništiPoništi
-
-
-
Makes sense, thanks :)
Hvala. Twitter će to iskoristiti za poboljšanje vaše vremenske crte. PoništiPoništi
-
Čini se da učitavanje traje već neko vrijeme.
Twitter je možda preopterećen ili ima kratkotrajnih poteškoća u radu. Pokušajte ponovno ili potražite dodatne informacije u odjeljku Status Twittera.