-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 9
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Skip 004 - Cloud Identity and Access Management #9
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
Signed-off-by: David Justice <[email protected]>
replicas: 1 | ||
executor: containerd-shim-spin | ||
workloadIdentity: | ||
enabled: true |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Does the user need the ability to enable/disable workload identity within the manifest? I'm wondering if the presence of providers
, serviceAccount
, or other fields not being nil
is enough to consider that the user is opting into workload identity or not.
If this is the wrong place to debate the schema of the workloadIdentity
object, let me know. :)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
You, sir, have come to the right place. Step on up to debate the schema!!
I'm indifferent about the enabled
field. Truth be told, I deleted 1 less time than I typed it. I believe that having a provider and service account defined may be adequate to determine the behavior is enabled.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Schema debates aside (and pending figuring out what we let come from secrets/configmaps or require inline), I think this is a great start and is definitely roughly in-line with what I was thinking 🎉
Creating an IAM role and a service account for AWS creds will resolve this issue of supporting the SQS trigger with the spin operator: spinkube/spin-operator#362 |
As we had discussed in a previous SpinKube meeting, and related to fermyon/spin#2678 & fermyon/spin#2566, this draft proposal addresses the role of the Spin operator in managing the use of federated cloud identities to provide authentication and authorization to cloud services (e.g. variable providers, key value stores, etc.).
I would like to solicit the community's feedback on the approach and structures described in the proposal.
In the initial draft, I have used an example that I'm most familiar with. However, I believe the pattern will hold based on the investigation I've done across Google, AWS, and Azure.