are authenticated urls at s3 secure? - amazon-s3

I have some files stored at amazon. all in private mode, and since I need provide users a way to download these files, each time an user needs to download a file I just create a authenticated url according to Authenticating REST Requests and the user can download the file for a gap of 5 minutes.
BUT once the url is generated I can see in the url my amazon key, is this something I should worry about? (I mean I know you need to have the secret key also to access to any object) but still this being secure?

The key is fine to publicly distribute, the secret is not.
So the answer is yes!
Edit: The public key along with the secret is used to generate the nonce / signature. You need both to generate valid (secured) requests for amazon. The secret is private however.

Related

Obtain short lived access token from dropbox without redirect url(through .net code or javascript)

I am trying to implement a way to obtain a short lived access token from dropbox, then upload multiple file to a folder. and finally revoke the token.
This can obtain access token can be .net code or in javascript. But what I am seeing from the dropbox documentation is having a redirect url which I don't want to redirect anything.
also I do not need to ask the end user to allow anything, what I need is to get a temp access token and upload some files.
This scenario is doable in Amazon S3 by generating a short lived policy for file upload.
Thanks for any help.

Backblaze B2 download with "presigned URL"

Situation: I run a Django app in the web, where logged-in users can also download .pdf files (non-public, with specific restrictions, depending on user rights). The most convenient way to do so (e.g. in S3) is to use a time-restricted, pre-signed URL because they open immediately in the browser, plus the app server does not have to handle additional traffic.
Problem: Backblaze B2 oviously does not offer an explicit method for creating presigned URLs to download non-public files directly in the browser.
Generating the api URL and the authorization token, and fetching the file from the object store happens at the app server level and the process is not exposed to the "ordinary" user.
But in the end, the API operation "b2_download_file_by_name" just uses a GET request, which means I can add the authorization token to the request's URL using "?Authorization=123xyz........". This way I get a presigned URL that works perfectly fine in the browser to allow access to a specific non-public file for a limited time. (Please note: B2 downloads can be restricted to files with specific prefixes [like s3 pseudo-folders], but if the specified "prefix" is long enough, I can make the auth token specific for one file.)
Question: As I wrote above, usually the authorization token is not exposed to the user. Now, if I make the URL visible, does this imply a security risk? In other words, could a user that posesses one or many tokens, extract the general access key from the token, or is the token encrypted well enough to avoid this?
According to the documentation for the b2_download_file_by_name call you can use the download authorization in a URL in the way you describe.
An authorization token can be provided in the URL query string instead of being passed in the HTTP header. An account authorization token obtained from b2_authorize_account will allow access to all files in a private bucket. A download authorization token obtained from b2_get_download_authorization will allow access to files whose names begin with the filename prefix used to generate the download authorization token.
However it seems that the expiry time set in the b2_get_download_authorization call is being ignored so the resulting URL never expires which is not secure of course. I have a support ticket in with B2 about this so hoping for a solution.

Setting different S3 read permissions based on uploader

I'm trying to arrive at a situation, where
one class of users can upload files that are subsequently not publicly available
another class of users can upload files that are publicly available.
I think I need to use two IAM users:
the first which has putObject permissions only and where I bake the secret key into javascript. (I use the AWS SDK putObject here, and bake in the first secret key)
the other where I keep the secret key on the server, and provide signatures for uploading to signed-in users of the right category. (I ended up using a POST command for this with multipart form-data, as I could not understand how to do it with the SDK other than baking in the second secret key, which would be bad as files can be uploaded and downloaded)
But I'm struggling to set up bucket permissions that support some files being publicly available while others are not at all.
Is there a way, or do I need to use separate buckets?
Update
Based on the first comment, I tried to add "acl": "public-read" to my policy and POST form data fields. The signatures are matching correctly, but I am now getting a forbidden response from AWS, which I don't get when this field is absent (but then the uploads are not publicly visible)

Amazon S3 authentiaction model

What is the proper way of delegating file access authentication from S3 to our authentiation service?
For example: web site's user(he have our session id in headers) sending request to S3 to get file by url. S3 sends request to our authentication service asking if user with such headers can access that file, and if our auth service allow getting that file it will be downloaded.
There are a lot of information about presigned requests but absolutely nothing about s3 quering with "hidden" authentication.
If a file has been made public on S3, then of course anyone can download it, using a direct link to the file.
If the file is not public, then there needs to be some type of authentication. There are really only two ways a file from S3 can be obtained if it is not public, one is via a pre-signed url, and the other is to be an Amazon user who has access to S3. Obviously this is how it works when you yourself want to access an object on S3, you must provide your access key and a signature in the header of the GET request. You can grant other users access to S3 via Amazon IAM, which is more like the 'hidden' authentication you mentioned. Via the IAM route, there are different ways of providing access including Federated Users. Visit this link to learn more:
http://docs.aws.amazon.com/AmazonS3/latest/dev/MakingAuthenticatedRequests.html
If you are simply trying to provide a authenticated user access to a file, the best and easiest way to do that would be to create a pre-signed url with an expiration time. The expiration time can be something short, like 10 minutes or even 1 minute, to prevent the user from passing the link to others.

What information do I need to give an external dev team to access and upload files to my Amazon S3 account?

I'm new to Amazon S3, and do not want to give more information than is necessary for the team to whom I'm outsourcing a project. They are building an image hosting site, and would need access to my S3 credentials - what exactly would the devs need to have access to? Just my Access Key ID?
Thanks.
They'll need an Access Key ID & corresponding Secret Access Key.
You can generate a unique one for them to use via the Security Credentials Page in the Account section of the website.
When they're done, you can delete there key and make a different one to use for the live site. Just make sure that when they develop the app they put the key information in a configuration file so you can change it when they're done.