I created a service role using AWS documentation with the following trust relationship
{
"Version": "2012-10-17",
"Statement": [
{
"Sid": "",
"Effect": "Allow",
"Principal": {
"Service": "glue.amazonaws.com"
},
"Action": "sts:AssumeRole"
}
]
}
In terms of the policies attached to the role, I have attached AWSGlueService policy and Amazons3FullAccess policy. Additionally I have attached the kms policy as below just in case if it tries to decrypt something
{
"Version": "2012-10-17",
"Statement": [
{
"Effect": "Allow",
"Action": [
"kms:"
],
"Resource": [
""
]
}
]
}
As a matter of fact, I tried this in one AWS account and I tried to create database, and I can create a database under AWS Glue>Databases>Add Database. It is working fine.
When I try to confiqure the same policies in another aws account, it throws the following error
{"service":"AWSGlue","statusCode":400,"errorCode":"GlueEncryptionException","requestId":"5c852699-d6c8-48df-8793-bbaab85cf783","errorMessage":"Invalid keyId aws/glue (Service: AWSKMS; Status Code: 400; Error Code: NotFoundException; Request ID: 314f7791-8b25-4bcc-bf56-b0b55e76d300; Proxy: null)","type":"AwsServiceError"}
I kind of understand that I am missing something fundamental. I could not get this resolved. Please could you help me understand, what I am missing in the permissions.
I have a CodePipeline Pipeline with a CodeBuild stage
Here is my buildspec :
{
"version": "0.2",
"phases": {
"build": {
"commands": [
"echo \"Hello, CodeBuild!\"",
"echo \"ca marche\" > test.txt",
"mkdir site-content",
"aws s3 sync s3://my-super-bucket-name site-content",
"ls - al"
]
}
},
"artifacts": {
"files": [
"test.txt"
]
}
}
The build project Service Role is defined with a default cdk generated policy, plus this one :
{
"Version": "2012-10-17",
"Statement": [
{
"Action": "s3:*",
"Resource": [
"arn:aws:s3:::my-super-bucket-name",
"arn:aws:s3:::my-super-bucket-name/* "
],
"Effect": "Allow"
}
]
}
And codebuild.amazonaws.com is a trusted entities for the Role
On the bucket side, I have this bucket policy :
{
"Version": "2012-10-17",
"Id": "PolicyXXXXXXXXXXXXX",
"Statement": [
{
"Sid": "StmtYYYYYYYYYYYYY",
"Effect": "Allow",
"Principal": {
"AWS": "arn:aws:iam::12345678910:user/a-user-for-another-process"
},
"Action": "s3:*",
"Resource": "arn:aws:s3:::my-super-bucket-name"
}
]
}
But the build project fail with this :
[Container] 2021/02/03 09:57:43 Running command aws s3 sync s3://my-super-bucket-name site-content
download failed: s3://my-super-bucket-name/test.txt to site-content/test.txt An error occurred (AccessDenied) when calling the GetObject operation: Access Denied
Completed 4 Bytes/13.7 KiB (0 Bytes/s) with 4 file(s) remaining
Help !
EDIT :
I just add this statement to the bucket policy :
{
"Effect": "Allow",
"Principal": {
"AWS": "arn:aws:iam::XXXXXXXXXXXXX:role/my-role"
},
"Action": "s3:*",
"Resource": "arn:aws:s3:::my-super-bucket-name"
}
But I have the same error :(
EDIT 2 :
Silly me ! It was :
"Resource": "arn:aws:s3:::my-super-bucket-name*"
Now it work !
You should modify the bucket policy to grant explicit access to you code build role, as the privileges are checked first based on bucket policy if there was no bucket policy attached to bucket then they way how you are trying would have worked.
I'm trying to import my OVA image from my s3 bucket using the AWS CLI. I have
aws ec2 import-image --disk-containers Format=ova,UserBucket="{S3Bucket=arn:aws:s3:::my-vm-rony,"S3Key=windows_7.ova}"
I'm getting the following message:
"An error occurred (InvalidParameter) when calling the ImportImage
operation: User does not have access to the S3 object"
My AWS user have the following permission:
AmazonS3FullAccess,
AdministratorAccess, AWSImportExportFullAccess, VMImportExportRoleForAWSConnector, AWSImportExportReadOnlyAccess, vmimport
I added to my bucket policy
{
"Version": "2012-10-17",
"Statement": [
{
"Sid": "Stmt1476979061000",
"Effect": "Allow",
"Principal": {
"AWS": "arn:aws:iam::109816374014:user/RonyLevi"
},
"Action": "s3:*",
"Resource": [
"arn:aws:s3:::my-vm-rony",
"arn:aws:s3:::my-vm-rony/*"
]
}
]
}
It should be a bucket name, not ARN:
aws ec2 import-image --disk-containers Format=ova,UserBucket="{S3Bucket=my-vm-rony,S3Key=windows_7.ova}"
Executive summary of the problem. I have a bucket let's call it bucket A that is setup with a default Customer KMS key (will call the id: 1111111) in one account, which we will call 123. In that bucket there are two objects, which are both under the same path within this bucket. They have the same KMS key ID and the same Owner. When I attempt to sync these to a new bucket B in a different account, let's account 456, one is successfully sync'd over but the other is not and instead I get:
An error occurred (AccessDenied) when calling the CopyObject operation: Access Denied
Has anyone seen inconsistent behavior like this before? I say inconsistent because there is absolutely no difference in the access rights between these but one is successful and another isn't. Note: my summary states two objects for simplicity but one of my real cases there are 30 objects where 2 are copying over and the rest failing and within some other paths different mixed results.
The following describes conditions -- some data obfuscated for security but in a consistent manner:
Bucket A (com.mycompany.datalake.us-east-1) Bucket Policy:
{
"Version": "2012-10-17",
"Statement": [
{
"Sid": "AllowAccess",
"Effect": "Allow",
"Principal": {
"AWS": [
"arn:aws:iam::123:root",
"arn:aws:iam::456:root"
]
},
"Action": [
"s3:PutObjectTagging",
"s3:PutObjectAcl",
"s3:PutObject",
"s3:ListBucket",
"s3:GetObject"
],
"Resource": [
"arn:aws:s3:::com.mycompany.datalake.us-east-1/security=0/*",
"arn:aws:s3:::com.mycompany.datalake.us-east-1"
]
},
{
"Sid": "DenyIfNotGrantingFullAccess",
"Effect": "Deny",
"Principal": {
"AWS": [
"arn:aws:iam::123:root",
"arn:aws:iam::456:root"
]
},
"Action": "s3:PutObject",
"Resource": [
"arn:aws:s3:::com.mycompany.datalake.us-east-1/security=0/*",
"arn:aws:s3:::com.mycompany.datalake.us-east-1"
],
"Condition": {
"StringNotLike": {
"s3:x-amz-acl": "bucket-owner-full-control"
}
}
},
{
"Sid": "DenyIfNotUsingExpectedKmsKey",
"Effect": "Deny",
"Principal": {
"AWS": [
"arn:aws:iam::123:root",
"arn:aws:iam::456:root"
]
},
"Action": "s3:PutObject",
"Resource": [
"arn:aws:s3:::com.mycompany.datalake.us-east-1/security=0/*",
"arn:aws:s3:::com.mycompany.datalake.us-east-1"
],
"Condition": {
"StringNotLike": {
"s3:x-amz-server-side-encryption-aws-kms-key-id": "arn:aws:kms:us-east-1:123:key/1111111"
}
}
}
]
}
Also in the source account, I have created an assumed role, which I call datalake_full_access_role:
{
"Version": "2012-10-17",
"Statement": [
{
"Effect": "Allow",
"Action": [
"s3:ListBucket",
"s3:GetObject"
],
"Resource": [
"arn:aws:s3:::com.mycompany.datalake.us-east-1/security=0/*",
"arn:aws:s3:::com.mycompany.datalake.us-east-1"
]
}
]
}
Which has a Trusted relationship with account 456. Also worth mentioning is that currently the policy for the KMS key 1111111 is wide open:
{
"Version": "2012-10-17",
"Id": "key-default-1",
"Statement": [
{
"Sid": "Enable IAM User Permissions",
"Effect": "Allow",
"Principal": {
"AWS": "*"
},
"Action": "kms:*",
"Resource": "*"
},
{
"Effect": "Allow",
"Principal": {
"AWS": "*"
},
"Action": [
"kms:Encrypt*",
"kms:Decrypt*",
"kms:ReEncrypt*",
"kms:GenerateDataKey*",
"kms:Describe*"
],
"Resource": "*"
}
]
}
Now for the target bucket B (mycompany-us-west-2-datalake) in account 456, the Bucket Policy:
{
"Version": "2012-10-17",
"Statement": [
{
"Sid": "AccountBasedAccess",
"Effect": "Allow",
"Principal": {
"AWS": "arn:aws:iam::456:root"
},
"Action": "s3:*",
"Resource": [
"arn:aws:s3:::mycompany-us-west-2-datalake",
"arn:aws:s3:::mycompany-us-west-2-datalake/*"
]
}
]
}
To do the migration (the sync) I provision an EC2 instance within the 456 account and attach to it an instance profile that has the following policies attached to it:
{
"Version": "2012-10-17",
"Statement": [
{
"Effect": "Allow",
"Action": "sts:AssumeRole",
"Resource": "arn:aws:iam::123:role/datalake_full_access_role"
}
]
}
{
"Version": "2012-10-17",
"Statement": [
{
"Effect": "Allow",
"Action": [
"kms:DescribeKey",
"kms:ReEncrypt*",
"kms:CreateGrant",
"kms:Decrypt"
],
"Resource": [
"arn:aws:kms:us-east-1:123:key/1111111"
]
}
]
}
{
"Version": "2012-10-17",
"Statement": [
{
"Effect": "Allow",
"Action": [
"s3:GetObject",
"s3:ListBucket"
],
"Resource": [
"arn:aws:s3:::com.mycompany.datalake.us-east-1",
"arn:aws:s3:::com.mycompany.datalake.us-east-1/security=0/*"
]
}
]
}
{
"Version": "2012-10-17",
"Statement": [
{
"Effect": "Allow",
"Action": "s3:*",
"Resource": [
"arn:aws:s3:::mycompany-us-west-2-datalake",
"arn:aws:s3:::mycompany-us-west-2-datalake/*"
]
}
]
}
Now on the EC2 instance I install latest aws version:
$ aws --version
aws-cli/1.16.297 Python/3.5.2 Linux/4.4.0-1098-aws botocore/1.13.33
and then run my sync command:
aws s3 sync s3://com.mycompany.datalake.us-east-1 s3://mycompany-us-west-2-datalake --source-region us-east-1 --region us-west-2 --acl bucket-owner-full-control --exclude '*' --include '*/zone=raw/Event/*' --no-progress
I believe I've done my homework and this all should work and for several objects it does but not all and I have nothing else up my sleeve to try at this point. Note I have been 100% successful in syncing to a local directory on the EC2 instance and then from the local directory to the new bucket with the following two calls:
aws s3 sync s3://com.mycompany.datalake.us-east-1 datalake --source-region us-east-1 --exclude '*' --include '*/zone=raw/Event/*' --no-progress
aws s3 sync datalake s3://mycompany-us-west-2-datalake --region us-west-2 --acl bucket-owner-full-control --exclude '*' --include '*/zone=raw/Event/*' --no-progress
This absolutely makes no sense as from an access POV there is no difference. The following is a look into the attributes of two objects in the source bucket, one that succeeds and one that fails:
Successful object:
Owner
Dev.Awsmaster
Last modified
Jan 12, 2019 10:11:48 AM GMT-0800
Etag
12ab34
Storage class
Standard
Server-side encryption
AWS-KMS
KMS key ID
arn:aws:kms:us-east-1:123:key/1111111
Size
9.2 MB
Key
security=0/zone=raw/Event/11_96152d009794494efeeae49ed10da653.avro
Failed object:
Owner
Dev.Awsmaster
Last modified
Jan 12, 2019 10:05:26 AM GMT-0800
Etag
45cd67
Storage class
Standard
Server-side encryption
AWS-KMS
KMS key ID
arn:aws:kms:us-east-1:123:key/1111111
Size
3.2 KB
Key
security=0/zone=raw/Event/05_6913583e47f457e9e25e9ea05cc9c7bb.avro
ADDENDUM: After looking through several cases I am starting to see a pattern. I think there may be an issue when the object is too small. In 10 out of 10 directories analyzed where some but not all objects synced successfully, all that were successful had a size of 8MB or more and all that failed were under 8MB. Could this be a bug with aws s3 sync when KMS is in the mix? I am wondering if I can tweak the ~/.aws/config such that it may address this?
I found a solution; although, I still think this is a bug with aws s3 sync. By setting the following in the ~./aws/config all objects synced successfully:
[default]
output = json
s3 =
signature_version = s3v4
multipart_threshold = 1
The signature_version I had before but figured I would provide it for completeness in case someone has a similar need. The new entry is multipart_threshold = 1, which means an object with any size at all will trigger a multipart upload. I didn't specify the multipart_chunksize, which according to documentation will default to 5MB.
Honestly, this requirement doesn't make sense as it shouldn't matter if the object was uploaded to S3 previously using multipart or not and I know this doesn't matter when KMS isn't involved but apparently it does matter when it is.
I used this policy on AWS to try connecting AoC with an S3 bucket:
{
"Version": "2012-10-17",
"Statement": [
{
"Effect": "Allow",
"Principal": {
"AWS": "arn:aws:iam::880559705280:role/atp-aws-us-east-1-ts-atc-node"
},
"Action": "sts:AssumeRole",
"Condition": {
"StringLike": {
"sts:ExternalId": "crn:v1:bluemix:public:aspservice-service:global:a/2dd2425e9a424641a12855a1fd5e85ee:70740386-6ca4-4473-bf9b-69a1fd22be12:::c1893698-abfa-4934-a7ca-1a6d837df5e0"
}
}
}
]
}
but when copied on Bucket Policy, I receive Error: Statement is missing required element.
What is wrong?
You need to paste this policy file into Trust relationship policy in Role tab.