Tag Archives: Security, Identity & Compliance

AWS achieves QI2/QC2 qualification to host critical data and workloads from the Italian Public Administration

Post Syndicated from Giuseppe Russo original https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/security/aws-achieves-qi2-qc2-qualification-to-host-critical-data-and-workloads-from-the-italian-public-administration/

Amazon Web Service (AWS) is pleased to announce that it has achieved the QI2/QC2 qualification level, set out by the Italian National Cybersecurity Agency (ACN) in Determination No. 307/2022, for AWS cloud infrastructure and 130 AWS cloud services. The scope of this qualification level includes the management of Critical data and workloads for Italian public administration customers. Customers and partners who manage workloads identified as Critical, according to the rules set out in ACN Determination No. 307/2022, can now benefit from the qualification achieved by AWS.

Obtaining the ACN QI2/QC2 qualification for managing critical data and workloads means that AWS meets the 366 requirements for security, processing capacity, infrastructure reliability, and scalability of cloud services, including being certified according to security and compliance standards such as ISO 9001, ISO/IEC 27001:2013, ISO/IEC 27017:2015, ISO/IEC 27018:2019, Cloud Security Alliance – Star Level 2, ISO 22301, and ISO 20000.

Qualification of cloud infrastructure and services is an integral part of the Italian Cloud Strategy, issued by the Department for Digital Transformation and ACN. The strategy contains guidelines for migrating data and digital services of the Italian Public Administration to the cloud.

The Italian Cloud Strategy starts from the principle that public administrations manage data and workloads that operate at different levels of criticality. When migrating from an on-premises solution to the cloud, public administrations must identify which risk class their workloads and data belong to.

ACN has identified the following three classes of data in relation to the damage that could be caused to the country in the event of a breach in terms of confidentiality, integrity, and availability.

  1. Ordinary: Data and services whose deterioration does not cause the interruption of the state service nor, in any case, harm the economic and social wellbeing of the country.
  2. Critical: Data and services whose compromise could compromise the maintenance of important functions for society, health, safety, and the economic and social wellbeing of the country.
  3. Strategic: Data and services that, if compromised, can have an impact on national security.

Different levels of criticality require different levels of qualification according to the following scheme.
 

AWS achieves QI2/QC2 qualification

Figure 1. Different levels of criticality require different levels of qualification

Thanks to the presence of the AWS Europe (Milan) Region since April 2020, and the new QI2/QC2 qualification obtained by AWS, our customers and partners can now feel confident to develop innovative cloud services that manage the critical workloads of the Italian Public Administration that run on AWS cloud infrastructure. The qualification obtained by AWS will be available on the ACN Cloud Market Place in the next weeks.

Our customers can refer to the AWS QI2/QC2 qualification to confirm that the AWS control environment is designed and implemented appropriately. By receiving the qualification to manage Critical workloads, AWS demonstrates our commitment to meet the highest security expectations for cloud service providers set out by ACN.

As always, we value your feedback and questions. Reach out to the AWS Compliance team through the Contact Us page. To learn more about our other compliance and security programs, see AWS Compliance Programs.

If you have feedback about this post, submit comments in the Comments section below. If you have questions about this post, contact AWS Support.

Want more AWS Security news? Follow us on Twitter.

Giuseppe Russo

Giuseppe Russo

Giuseppe is Security Assurance Manager for Italy, based in Rome. Giuseppe has a Master’s Degree in Computer Science with a specialization in cryptography, security and coding theory. Giuseppe is a seasoned information security practitioner with many years of experience engaging regulators, key stakeholders, developing guidelines, and influencing the security market on strategic topics such as privacy and critical infrastructure protection.

Daniele Basriev

Daniele Basriev

Daniele is a security audit program manager at AWS based in Amsterdam, the Netherlands. Daniele leads security audits, attestations, and certification programs across Europe. For the past 19 years, he has worked with a wide range of technologies, control frameworks, and business risks within complex fast-paced environments. He built his expertise initially within the international consultancy environment and Big Four accounting firms, and then moved into IT security strategy, IT governance, and compliance across multiple industries. His expertise includes, but not limited to, information systems audits, third-party and vendor risk management, IT risk management, business continuity, security governance, and compliance.

Deploy AWS WAF faster with Security Automations

Post Syndicated from Harith Gaddamanugu original https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/security/deploy-aws-managed-rules-using-security-automations-for-aws-waf/

You can now deploy AWS WAF managed rules as part of the Security Automations for AWS WAF solution. In this post, we show you how to get started and set up monitoring for this automated solution with additional recommendations.

This article discusses AWS WAF, a service that assists you in protecting against typical web attacks and bots that might disrupt availability, compromise security, or consume excessive resources. As requests for your websites are received by the underlying service, they’re forwarded to AWS WAF for inspection against your rules. AWS WAF informs the underlying service to either block, allow, or take another configured action when a request fulfills the criteria stated in your rules. AWS WAF is tightly integrated with Amazon CloudFront, Application Load Balancer (ALB), Amazon API Gateway, and AWS AppSync—all of which are routinely used by AWS customers to provide content for their websites and applications.

To provide a simple, purpose-driven deployment approach, our solutions builder teams developed Security Automations for AWS WAF, a solution that can help organizations that don’t have dedicated security teams to quickly deploy an AWS WAF that filters common web-based malicious activity. Security Automations for AWS WAF deploys a set of preconfigured rules to help you protect your applications from common web exploits.

This solution can be installed in your AWS accounts by launching the provided AWS CloudFormation template.

Security Automations for AWS WAF provides the following features and benefits:

  • Helps secure your web applications with AWS managed rule groups
  • Provide layer 7 flood protection with a predefined HTTP flood custom rule
  • Helps block exploitation of vulnerabilities with a predefined scanners and probes custom rule
  • Detect and deflect intrusion from bots with a honeypot endpoint using a bad bot custom rule
  • Helps block malicious IP addresses based on AWS and external IP reputation lists
  • Building a monitoring dashboard with Amazon CloudWatch
  • Integration with AWS Service Catalog AppRegistry and AWS Systems Manager Application Manager
Figure 1: Design overview of the new Security Automations for AWS WAF solution

Figure 1: Design overview of the new Security Automations for AWS WAF solution

Getting started

Many customers begin their proofs of concept (POC) by using the AWS Management Console for AWS WAF to set up their very first AWS WAF, but quickly realize the benefits of automation, such as increased productivity, enforcing best practices, avoiding repetition, and so on. Manually managing AWS WAF can be time-consuming, especially if you want to duplicate complicated automations across multiple environments.

You can deploy this solution for new and existing supported AWS WAF resources. The implementation guide discusses architectural considerations, configuration steps, and operational best practices for deploying this solution in the AWS Cloud. It includes links to AWS CloudFormation templates and stacks that launch, configure, and run the AWS security, compute, storage, and other services required to deploy this solution on AWS, using AWS best practices for security and availability.

Before you launch the CloudFormation template, review the architecture and configuration considerations discussed in this guide. The template takes about 15 minutes to deploy and includes three basic steps:

Step 1. Launch the stack

  1. Launch the CloudFormation template into your AWS account and select the desired AWS Region.
  2. Enter values for the required parameters: Stack name and Application access log bucket name.
  3. Review the other template parameters and adjust if necessary.

Step 2. Associate the web ACL with your web application

Associate your CloudFront web distributions or ALBs with the web ACL that this solution generates. You can associate as many distributions or load balancers as you want.

Step 3. Configure web access logging

Turn on web access logging for your CloudFront web distributions or ALBs, and send the log files to the appropriate Amazon Simple Storage Service (Amazon S3) bucket. Save the logs in a folder matching the user-defined prefix. If no user-defined prefix is used, save the logs to AWSLogs (default log prefix AWSLogs/).

Customize the solution

This solution provides an example of how to use AWS WAF and other services to build security automations on the AWS Cloud. You can download the open source code from GitHub to apply customizations or build your own security automations that fit your needs. The solution builder team is planning to release a Terraform version for this solution in the near future.

Monitor the solution

This solution includes a Service Catalog AppRegistry resource to register the CloudFormation template and underlying resources as an application in both the Service Catalog AppRegistry and Systems Manager Application Manager. You can monitor the costs and operations data in the Systems Manager console, as shown in Figure 2 that follows.

Figure 2: Example of the application view for the Security Automations for AWS WAF stack in Application Manager

Figure 2: Example of the application view for the Security Automations for AWS WAF stack in Application Manager

CloudWatch dashboards are customizable home pages in the CloudWatch console that you can use to monitor your resources in a single view, including visualizing AWS WAF logs as shown in Figure 3 that follows. The solution creates a simple dashboard that you can customize to monitor additional metrics, alarms and logs. If suspicious activity is reported, you can use the visuals to understand the traffic in more detail and drive incident response actions as needed. From here, you can investigate further by using specific queries with CloudWatch Logs Insights.

Figure 3: Example of an enhanced AWS WAF CloudWatch dashboard that can be built for monitoring your site traffic

Figure 3: Example of an enhanced AWS WAF CloudWatch dashboard that can be built for monitoring your site traffic

Conclusion

In this post, you learned about using the AWS Security Automation template to quickly deploy AWS WAF. If you prefer a simpler solution, we recommend using the one-click CloudFront AWS WAF setup, which offers a simple way to deploy AWS WAF for your CloudFront distribution. By choosing the approach that aligns with your requirements, you can enhance the security of your web applications and safeguard them against potential threats.

For more solutions, visit the AWS Solutions Library.

 
If you have feedback about this post, submit comments in the Comments section below. If you have questions about this post, contact AWS Support.

Want more AWS Security news? Follow us on Twitter.

Harith Gaddamanugu

Harith Gaddamanugu

Harith works at AWS as a Sr. Edge Specialist Solutions Architect. He stays motivated by solving problems for customers across AWS Perimeter Protection and Edge services. When he is not working, he enjoys spending time outdoors with friends and family.

Enable external pipeline deployments to AWS Cloud by using IAM Roles Anywhere

Post Syndicated from Olivier Gaumond original https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/security/enable-external-pipeline-deployments-to-aws-cloud-by-using-iam-roles-anywhere/

Continuous integration and continuous delivery (CI/CD) services help customers automate deployments of infrastructure as code and software within the cloud. Common native Amazon Web Services (AWS) CI/CD services include AWS CodePipeline, AWS CodeBuild, and AWS CodeDeploy. You can also use third-party CI/CD services hosted outside the AWS Cloud, such as Jenkins, GitLab, and Azure DevOps, to deploy code within the AWS Cloud through temporary security credentials use.

Security credentials allow identities (for example, IAM role or IAM user) to verify who they are and the permissions they have to interact with another resource. The AWS Identity and Access Management (IAM) service authentication and authorization process requires identities to present valid security credentials to interact with another AWS resource.

According to AWS security best practices, where possible, we recommend relying on temporary credentials instead of creating long-term credentials such as access keys. Temporary security credentials, also referred to as short-term credentials, can help limit the impact of inadvertently exposed credentials because they have a limited lifespan and don’t require periodic rotation or revocation. After temporary security credentials expire, AWS will no longer approve authentication and authorization requests made with these credentials.

In this blog post, we’ll walk you through the steps on how to obtain AWS temporary credentials for your external CI/CD pipelines by using IAM Roles Anywhere and an on-premises hosted server running Azure DevOps Services.

Deploy securely on AWS using IAM Roles Anywhere

When you run code on AWS compute services, such as AWS Lambda, AWS provides temporary credentials to your workloads. In hybrid information technology environments, when you want to authenticate with AWS services from outside of the cloud, your external services need AWS credentials.

IAM Roles Anywhere provides a secure way for your workloads — such as servers, containers, and applications running outside of AWS — to request and obtain temporary AWS credentials by using private certificates. You can use IAM Roles Anywhere to enable your applications that run outside of AWS to obtain temporary AWS credentials, helping you eliminate the need to manage long-term credentials or complex temporary credential solutions for workloads running outside of AWS.

To use IAM Roles Anywhere, your workloads require an X.509 certificate, issued by your private certificate authority (CA), to request temporary security credentials from the AWS Cloud.

IAM Roles Anywhere can work with your existing client or server certificates that you issue to your workloads today. In this blog post, our objective is to show how you can use X.509 certificates issued by your public key infrastructure (PKI) solution to gain access to AWS resources by using IAM Roles Anywhere. Here we don’t cover PKI solutions options, and we assume that you have your own PKI solution for certificate generation. In this post, we demonstrate the IAM Roles Anywhere setup with a self-signed certificate for the purpose of the demo running in a test environment.

External CI/CD pipeline deployments in AWS

CI/CD services are typically composed of a control plane and user interface. They are used to automate the configuration, orchestration, and deployment of infrastructure code or software. The code build steps are handled by a build agent that can be hosted on a virtual machine or container running on-premises or in the cloud. Build agents are responsible for completing the jobs defined by a CI/CD pipeline.

For this use case, you have an on-premises CI/CD pipeline that uses AWS CloudFormation to deploy resources within a target AWS account. The CloudFormation template, the pipeline definition, and other files are hosted in a Git repository. The on-premises build agent requires permissions to deploy code through AWS CloudFormation within an AWS account. To make calls to AWS APIs, the build agent needs to obtain AWS credentials from an IAM role. The solution architecture is shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1: Using external CI/CD tool with AWS

Figure 1: Using external CI/CD tool with AWS

To make this deployment securely, the main objective is to use short-term credentials and avoid the need to generate and store long-term credentials for your pipelines. This post walks through how to use IAM Roles Anywhere and certificate-based authentication with Azure DevOps build agents. The walkthrough will use Azure DevOps Services with Microsoft-hosted agents. This approach can be used with a self-hosted agent or Azure DevOps Server.

IAM Roles Anywhere and certificate-based authentication

IAM Roles Anywhere uses a private certificate authority (CA) for the temporary security credential issuance process. Your private CA is registered with IAM Roles Anywhere through a service-to-service trust. Once the trust is established, you create an IAM role with an IAM policy that can be assumed by your services running outside of AWS. The external service uses a private CA issued X.509 certificate to request temporary AWS credentials from IAM Roles Anywhere and then assumes the IAM role with permission to finish the authentication process, as shown in Figure 2.

Figure 2: Certificate-based authentication for external CI/CD tool using IAM Roles Anywhere

Figure 2: Certificate-based authentication for external CI/CD tool using IAM Roles Anywhere

The workflow in Figure 2 is as follows:

  1. The external service uses its certificate to sign and issue a request to IAM Roles Anywhere.
  2. IAM Roles Anywhere validates the incoming signature and checks that the certificate was issued by a certificate authority configured as a trust anchor in the account.
  3. Temporary credentials are returned to the external service, which can then be used for other authenticated calls to the AWS APIs.

Walkthrough

In this walkthrough, you accomplish the following steps:

  1. Deploy IAM roles in your workload accounts.
  2. Create a root certificate to simulate your certificate authority. Then request and sign a leaf certificate to distribute to your build agent.
  3. Configure an IAM Roles Anywhere trust anchor in your workload accounts.
  4. Configure your pipelines to use certificate-based authentication with a working example using Azure DevOps pipelines.

Preparation

You can find the sample code for this post in our GitHub repository. We recommend that you locally clone a copy of this repository. This repository includes the following files:

  • DynamoDB_Table.template: This template creates an Amazon DynamoDB table.
  • iamra-trust-policy.json: This trust policy allows the IAM Roles Anywhere service to assume the role and defines the permissions to be granted.
  • parameters.json: This passes parameters when launching the CloudFormation template.
  • pipeline-iamra.yml: The definition of the pipeline that deploys the CloudFormation template using IAM Roles Anywhere authentication.
  • pipeline-iamra-multi.yml: The definition of the pipeline that deploys the CloudFormation template using IAM Roles Anywhere authentication in multi-account environment.

The first step is creating an IAM role in your AWS accounts with the necessary permissions to deploy your resources. For this, you create a role using the AWSCloudFormationFullAccess and AmazonDynamoDBFullAccess managed policies.

When you define the permissions for your actual applications and workloads, make sure to adjust the permissions to meet your specific needs based on the principle of least privilege.

Run the following command to create the CICDRole in the Dev and Prod AWS accounts.

aws iam create-role --role-name CICDRole --assume-role-policy-document file://iamra-trust-policy.json
aws iam attach-role-policy --role-name CICDRole --policy-arn arn:aws:iam::aws:policy/AmazonDynamoDBFullAccess
aws iam attach-role-policy --role-name CICDRole --policy-arn arn:aws:iam::aws:policy/AWSCloudFormationFullAccess

As part of the role creation, you need to apply the trust policy provided in iamra-trust-policy.json. This trust policy allows the IAM Roles Anywhere service to assume the role with the condition that the Subject Common Name (CN) of the certificate is cicdagent.example.com. In a later step you will update this trust policy with the Amazon Resource Name (ARN) of your trust anchor to further restrict how the role can be assumed.

{
    "Version": "2012-10-17",
    "Statement": [
        {
            "Effect": "Allow",
            "Principal": {
                "Service": "rolesanywhere.amazonaws.com"
            },
            "Action": [
                "sts:AssumeRole",
                "sts:TagSession",
                "sts:SetSourceIdentity"
            ],
            "Condition": {
                "StringEquals": {
                    "aws:PrincipalTag/x509Subject/CN": "cicd-agent.example.com"
                }
            }
        }
    ]
}

Issue and sign a self-signed certificate

Use OpenSSL to generate and sign the certificate. Run the following commands to generate a root and leaf certificate.

Note: The following procedure has been tested with OpenSSL 1.1.1 and OpenSSL 3.0.8.

# generate key for CA certificate
openssl genrsa -out ca.key 2048

# generate CA certificate
openssl req -new -x509 -days 1826 -key ca.key -subj /CN=ca.example.com \
    -addext 'keyUsage=critical,keyCertSign,cRLSign,digitalSignature' \
    -addext 'basicConstraints=critical,CA:TRUE' -out ca.crt 

#generate key for leaf certificate
openssl genrsa -out private.key 2048

#request leaf certificate
cat > extensions.cnf <<EOF
[v3_ca]
keyUsage = digitalSignature, nonRepudiation, keyEncipherment, dataEncipherment
EOF

openssl req -new -key private.key -subj /CN=cicd-agent.example.com -out iamra-cert.csr

#sign leaf certificate with CA
openssl x509 -req -days 7 -in iamra-cert.csr -CA ca.crt -CAkey ca.key -set_serial 01 -extfile extensions.cnf -extensions v3_ca -out certificate.crt

The following files are needed in further steps: ca.crt, certificate.crt, private.key.

Configure the IAM Roles Anywhere trust anchor and profile in your workload accounts

In this step, you configure the IAM Roles Anywhere trust anchor, the profile, and the role with the associated IAM policy to define the permissions to be granted to your build agents. Make sure to set the permissions specified in the policy to the least privileged access.

To configure the IAM Role Anywhere trust anchor

  1. Open the IAM console and go to Roles Anywhere.
  2. Choose Create a trust anchor.
  3. Choose External certificate bundle and paste the content of your CA public certificate in the certificate bundle box (the content of the ca.crt file from the previous step). The configuration looks as follows:
Figure 3: IAM Roles Anywhere trust anchor

Figure 3: IAM Roles Anywhere trust anchor

To follow security best practices by applying least privilege access, add a condition statement in the IAM role’s trust policy to match the created trust anchor to make sure that only certificates that you want to assume a role through IAM Roles Anywhere can do so.

To update the trust policy of the created CICDRole

  1. Open the IAM console, select Roles, then search for CICDRole.
  2. Open CICDRole to update its configuration, and then select Trust relationships.
  3. Replace the existing policy with the following updated policy that includes an additional condition to match on the trust anchor. Replace the ARN ID in the policy with the ARN of the trust anchor created in your account.
Figure 4: IAM Roles Anywhere updated trust policy

Figure 4: IAM Roles Anywhere updated trust policy

{
    "Version": "2012-10-17",
    "Statement": [
        {
            "Effect": "Allow",
            "Principal": {
                "Service": "rolesanywhere.amazonaws.com"
            },
            "Action": [
                "sts:AssumeRole",
                "sts:TagSession",
                "sts:SetSourceIdentity"
            ],
            "Condition": {
                "StringEquals": {
                    "aws:PrincipalTag/x509Subject/CN": "cicd-agent.example.com"
                },
                "ArnEquals": {
                    "aws:SourceArn": "arn:aws:rolesanywhere:ca-central-1:111111111111:trust-anchor/9f084b8b-2a32-47f6-aee3-d027f5c4b03b"
                }
            }
        }
    ]
}

To create an IAM Role Anywhere profile and link the profile to CICDRole

  1. Open the IAM console and go to Roles Anywhere.
  2. Choose Create a profile.
  3. In the Profile section, enter a name.
  4. In the Roles section, select CICDRole.
  5. Keep the other options set to default.
Figure 5: IAM Roles Anywhere profile

Figure 5: IAM Roles Anywhere profile

Configure the Azure DevOps pipeline to use certificate-based authentication

Now that you’ve completed the necessary setup in AWS, you move to the configuration of your pipeline in Azure DevOps. You need to have access to an Azure DevOps organization to complete these steps.

Have the following values ready. They’re needed for the Azure DevOps Pipeline configuration. You need this set of information for every AWS account you want to deploy to.

  • Trust anchor ARN – Resource identifier for the trust anchor created when you configured IAM Roles Anywhere.
  • Profile ARN – The identifier of the IAM Roles Anywhere profile you created.
  • Role ARN – The ARN of the role to assume. This role needs to be configured in the profile.
  • Certificate – The certificate tied to the profile (in other words, the issued certificate: file certificate.crt).
  • Private key – The private key of the certificate (private.key).

Azure DevOps configuration steps

The following steps walk you through configuring Azure DevOps.

  1. Create a new project in Azure DevOps.
  2. Add the following files from the sample repository that you previously cloned to the Git Azure repo that was created as part of the project. (The simplest way to do this is to add a new remote to your local Git repository and push the files.)
    • DynamoDB_Table.template – The sample CloudFormation template you will deploy
    • parameters.json – This passes parameters when launching the CloudFormation template
    • pipeline-iamra.yml – The definition of the pipeline that deploys the CloudFormation template using IAM RA authentication
  3. Create a new pipeline:
    1. Select Azure Repos Git as your source.
    2. Select your current repository.
    3. Choose Existing Azure Pipelines YAML file.
    4. For the path, enter pipeline-iamra.yml.
    5. Select Save (don’t run the pipeline yet).
  4. In Azure DevOps, choose Pipelines, and then choose Library.
  5. Create a new variable group called aws-dev that will store the configuration values to deploy to your AWS Dev environment.
  6. Add variables corresponding to the values of the trust anchor profile and role to use for authentication.
    Figure 6: Azure DevOps configuration steps: Adding IAM Roles Anywhere variables

    Figure 6: Azure DevOps configuration steps: Adding IAM Roles Anywhere variables

  7. Save the group.
  8. Update the permissions to allow your pipeline to use the variable group.
    Figure 7: Azure DevOps configuration steps: Pipeline permissions

    Figure 7: Azure DevOps configuration steps: Pipeline permissions

  9. In the Library, choose the Secure files tab to upload the certificate and private key files that you generated previously.
    Figure 8: Azure DevOps configuration steps: Upload certificate and private key

    Figure 8: Azure DevOps configuration steps: Upload certificate and private key

  10. For each file, update the Pipeline permissions to provide access to the pipeline created previously.
    Figure 9: Azure DevOps configuration steps: Pipeline permissions for each file

    Figure 9: Azure DevOps configuration steps: Pipeline permissions for each file

  11. Run the pipeline and validate successful completion. In your AWS account, you should see a stack named my-stack-name that deployed a DynamoDB table.
    Figure 10: Verify CloudFormation stack deployment in your account

    Figure 10: Verify CloudFormation stack deployment in your account

Explanation of the pipeline-iamra.yml

Here are the different steps of the pipeline:

  1. The first step downloads and installs the credential helper tool that allows you to obtain temporary credentials from IAM Roles Anywhere.
    - bash: wget https://rolesanywhere.amazonaws.com/releases/1.0.3/X86_64/Linux/aws_signing_helper; chmod +x aws_signing_helper;
      displayName: Install AWS Signer

  2. The second step uses the DownloadSecureFile built-in task to retrieve the certificate and private key that you stored in the Azure DevOps secure storage.
    - task: DownloadSecureFile@1
      name: Certificate
      displayName: 'Download certificate'
      inputs:
        secureFile: 'certificate.crt'
    
    - task: DownloadSecureFile@1
      name: Privatekey
      displayName: 'Download private key'
      inputs:
        secureFile: 'private.key'

    The credential helper is configured to obtain temporary credentials by providing the certificate and private key as well as the role to assume and an IAM AWS Roles Anywhere profile to use. Every time the AWS CLI or AWS SDK needs to authenticate to AWS, they use this credential helper to obtain temporary credentials.

    bash: |
        aws configure set credential_process "./aws_signing_helper credential-process --certificate $(Certificate.secureFilePath) --private-key $(Privatekey.secureFilePath) --trust-anchor-arn $(TRUSTANCHORARN) --profile-arn $(PROFILEARN) --role-arn $(ROLEARN)" --profile default
        echo "##vso[task.setvariable variable=AWS_SDK_LOAD_CONFIG;]1"
      displayName: Obtain AWS Credentials

  3. The next step is for troubleshooting purposes. The AWS CLI is used to confirm the current assumed identity in your target AWS account.
    task: AWSCLI@1
      displayName: Check AWS identity
      inputs:
        regionName: 'ca-central-1'
        awsCommand: 'sts'
        awsSubCommand: 'get-caller-identity'

  4. The final step uses the CloudFormationCreateOrUpdateStack task from the AWS Toolkit for Azure DevOps to deploy the Cloud Formation stack. Usually, the awsCredentials parameter is used to point the task to the Service Connection with the AWS access keys and secrets. If you omit this parameter, the task looks instead for the credentials in the standard credential provider chain.
    task: CloudFormationCreateOrUpdateStack@1
      displayName: 'Create/Update Stack: Staging-Deployment'
      inputs:
        regionName:     'ca-central-1'
        stackName:      'my-stack-name'
        useChangeSet:   true
        changeSetName:  'my-stack-name-changeset'
        templateFile:   'DynamoDB_Table.template'
        templateParametersFile: 'parameters.json'
        captureStackOutputs: asVariables
        captureAsSecuredVars: false

Multi-account deployments

In this example, the pipeline deploys to a single AWS account. You can quickly extend it to support deployment to multiple accounts by following these steps:

  1. Repeat the Configure IAM Roles Anywhere Trust Anchor for each account.
  2. In Azure DevOps, create a variable group with the configuration specific to the additional account.
  3. In the pipeline definition, add a stage that uses this variable group.

The pipeline-iamra-multi.yml file in the sample repository contains such an example.

Cleanup

To clean up the AWS resources created in this article, follow these steps:

  1. Delete the deployed CloudFormation stack in your workload accounts.
  2. Remove the IAM trust anchor and profile from the workload accounts.
  3. Delete the CICDRole IAM role.

Alternative options available to obtain temporary credentials in AWS for CI/CD pipelines

In addition to the IAM Roles Anywhere option presented in this blog, there are two other options to issue temporary security credentials for the external build agent:

  • Option 1 – Re-host the build agent on an Amazon Elastic Compute Cloud (Amazon EC2) instance in the AWS account and assign an IAM role. (See IAM roles for Amazon EC2). This option resolves the issue of using long-term IAM access keys to deploy self-hosted build agents on an AWS compute service (such as Amazon EC2, AWS Fargate, or Amazon Elastic Kubernetes Service (Amazon EKS)) instead of using fully-managed or on-premises agents, but it would still require using multiple agents for pipelines that need different permissions.
  • Option 2 – Some DevOps tools support the use of OpenID Connect (OIDC). OIDC is an authentication layer based on open standards that makes it simpler for a client and an identity provider to exchange information. CI/CD tools such as GitHub, GitLab, and Bitbucket provide support for OIDC, which helps you to integrate with AWS for secure deployments and resources access without having to store credentials as long-lived secrets. However, not all CI/CD pipeline tools supports OIDC.

Conclusion

In this post, we showed you how to combine IAM Roles Anywhere and an existing public key infrastructure (PKI) to authenticate external build agents to AWS by using short-lived certificates to obtain AWS temporary credentials. We presented the use of Azure Pipelines for the demonstration, but you can adapt the same steps to other CI/CD tools running on premises or in other cloud platforms. For simplicity, the certificate was manually configured in Azure DevOps to be provided to the agents. We encourage you to automate the distribution of short-lived certificates based on an integration with your PKI.

For demonstration purposes, we included the steps of generating a root certificate and manually signing the leaf certificate. For production workloads, you should have access to a private certificate authority to generate certificates for use by your external build agent. If you do not have an existing private certificate authority, consider using AWS Private Certificate Authority.

If you have feedback about this post, submit comments in the Comments section below. If you have questions about this post, start a new thread on the AWS Security, Identity, & Compliance re:Post or contact AWS Support.

Want more AWS Security news? Follow us on Twitter.

Olivier Gaumond

Olivier Gaumond

Olivier is a Senior Solutions Architect supporting public sector customers from Quebec City. His varied experience in consulting, application development, and platform implementation allow him to bring a new perspective to projects. DevSecOps, containers, and cloud native development are among his topics of interest.

Manal Taki

Manal Taki

Manal is a solutions Architect at AWS, based in Toronto. She works with public sector customers to solve business challenges to drive their mission goals by using Amazon Web Services (AWS). She’s passionate about security, and works with customers to enable security best practices to build secure environments and workloads in the cloud.

2023 H1 IRAP report is now available on AWS Artifact for Australian customers

Post Syndicated from Patrick Chang original https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/security/2023-h1-irap-report-is-now-available-on-aws-artifact-for-australian-customers/

Amazon Web Services (AWS) is excited to announce that a new Information Security Registered Assessors Program (IRAP) report (2023 H1) is now available through AWS Artifact. An independent Australian Signals Directorate (ASD) certified IRAP assessor completed the IRAP assessment of AWS in August 2023.

The new IRAP report includes an additional six AWS services, as well as the new AWS Local Zone in Perth, that are now assessed at the PROTECTED level under IRAP. This brings the total number of services assessed at the PROTECTED level to 145.

The following are the six newly assessed services:

For the full list of services, see the IRAP tab on the AWS Services in Scope by Compliance Program page.

AWS has developed an IRAP documentation pack to assist Australian government agencies and their partners to plan, architect, and assess risk for their workloads when they use AWS Cloud services.

We developed this pack in accordance with the Australian Cyber Security Centre (ACSC) Cloud Security Guidance and Cloud Assessment and Authorisation framework, which addresses guidance within the Australian Government Information Security Manual (ISM), the Department of Home Affairs’ Protective Security Policy Framework (PSPF), and the Digital Transformation Agency Secure Cloud Strategy.

The IRAP pack on AWS Artifact also includes newly updated versions of the AWS Consumer Guide and the whitepaper Reference Architectures for ISM PROTECTED Workloads in the AWS Cloud.

Reach out to your AWS representatives to let us know which additional services you would like to see in scope for upcoming IRAP assessments. We strive to bring more services into scope at the PROTECTED level under IRAP to support your requirements.

 
If you have feedback about this post, submit comments in the Comments section below. If you have questions about this post, contact AWS Support.

Want more AWS Security news? Follow us on Twitter.

Patrick Chang

Patrick Chang

Patrick is the Asia Pacific and Japan (APJ) Audit Lead at AWS. He leads security audits, certifications, and compliance programs across the APJ region. Patrick is a technology risk and audit professional with over a decade of experience. He is passionate about delivering assurance programs that build trust with customers and provide them assurance on cloud security.

How to implement cryptographic modules to secure private keys used with IAM Roles Anywhere

Post Syndicated from Edouard Kachelmann original https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/security/how-to-implement-cryptographic-modules-to-secure-private-keys-used-with-iam-roles-anywhere/

AWS Identity and Access Management (IAM) Roles Anywhere enables workloads that run outside of Amazon Web Services (AWS), such as servers, containers, and applications, to use X.509 digital certificates to obtain temporary AWS credentials and access AWS resources, the same way that you use IAM roles for workloads on AWS. Now, IAM Roles Anywhere allows you to use PKCS #11–compatible cryptographic modules to help you securely store private keys associated with your end-entity X.509 certificates.

Cryptographic modules allow you to generate non-exportable asymmetric keys in the module hardware. The cryptographic module exposes high-level functions, such as encrypt, decrypt, and sign, through an interface such as PKCS #11. Using a cryptographic module with IAM Roles Anywhere helps to ensure that the private keys associated with your end-identity X.509 certificates remain in the module and cannot be accessed or copied to the system.

In this post, I will show how you can use PKCS #11–compatible cryptographic modules, such as YubiKey 5 Series and Thales ID smart cards, with your on-premises servers to securely store private keys. I’ll also show how to use those private keys and certificates to obtain temporary credentials for the AWS Command Line Interface (AWS CLI) and AWS SDKs.

Cryptographic modules use cases

IAM Roles Anywhere reduces the need to manage long-term AWS credentials for workloads running outside of AWS, to help improve your security posture. Now IAM Roles Anywhere has added support for compatible PKCS #11 cryptographic modules to the credential helper tool so that organizations that are currently using these (such as defense, government, or large enterprises) can benefit from storing their private keys on their security devices. This mitigates the risk of storing the private keys as files on servers where they can be accessed or copied by unauthorized users.

Note: If your organization does not implement PKCS #11–compatible modules, IAM Roles Anywhere credential helper supports OS certificate stores (Keychain Access for macOS and Cryptography API: Next Generation (CNG) for Windows) to help protect your certificates and private keys.

Solution overview

This authentication flow is shown in Figure 1 and is described in the following sections.

Figure 1: Authentication flow using crypto modules with IAM Roles Anywhere

Figure 1: Authentication flow using crypto modules with IAM Roles Anywhere

How it works

As a prerequisite, you must first create a trust anchor and profile within IAM Roles Anywhere. The trust anchor will establish trust between your public key infrastructure (PKI) and IAM Roles Anywhere, and the profile allows you to specify which roles IAM Roles Anywhere assumes and what your workloads can do with the temporary credentials. You establish trust between IAM Roles Anywhere and your certificate authority (CA) by creating a trust anchor. A trust anchor is a reference to either AWS Private Certificate Authority (AWS Private CA) or an external CA certificate. For this walkthrough, you will use the AWS Private CA.

The one-time initialization process (step “0 – Module initialization” in Figure 1) works as follows:

  1. You first generate the non-exportable private key within the secure container of the cryptographic module.
  2. You then create the X.509 certificate that will bind an identity to a public key:
    1. Create a certificate signing request (CSR).
    2. Submit the CSR to the AWS Private CA.
    3. Obtain the certificate signed by the CA in order to establish trust.
  3. The certificate is then imported into the cryptographic module for mobility purposes, to make it available and simple to locate when the module is connected to the server.

After initialization is done, the module is connected to the server, which can then interact with the AWS CLI and AWS SDK without long-term credentials stored on a disk.

To obtain temporary security credentials from IAM Roles Anywhere:

  1. The server will use the credential helper tool that IAM Roles Anywhere provides. The credential helper works with the credential_process feature of the AWS CLI to provide credentials that can be used by the CLI and the language SDKs. The helper manages the process of creating a signature with the private key.
  2. The credential helper tool calls the IAM Roles Anywhere endpoint to obtain temporary credentials that are issued in a standard JSON format to IAM Roles Anywhere clients via the API method CreateSession action.
  3. The server uses the temporary credentials for programmatic access to AWS services.

Alternatively, you can use the update or serve commands instead of credential-process. The update command will be used as a long-running process that will renew the temporary credentials 5 minutes before the expiration time and replace them in the AWS credentials file. The serve command will be used to vend temporary credentials through an endpoint running on the local host using the same URIs and request headers as IMDSv2 (Instance Metadata Service Version 2).

Supported modules

The credential helper tool for IAM Roles Anywhere supports most devices that are compatible with PKCS #11. The PKCS #11 standard specifies an API for devices that hold cryptographic information and perform cryptographic functions such as signature and encryption.

I will showcase how to use a YubiKey 5 Series device that is a multi-protocol security key that supports Personal Identity Verification (PIV) through PKCS #11. I am using YubiKey 5 Series for the purpose of demonstration, as it is commonly accessible (you can purchase it at the Yubico store or Amazon.com) and is used by some of the world’s largest companies as a means of providing a one-time password (OTP), Fast IDentity Online (FIDO) and PIV for smart card interface for multi-factor authentication. For a production server, we recommend using server-specific PKCS #11–compatible hardware security modules (HSMs) such as the YubiHSM 2, Luna PCIe HSM, or Trusted Platform Modules (TPMs) available on your servers.

Note: The implementation might differ with other modules, because some of these come with their own proprietary tools and drivers.

Implement the solution: Module initialization

You need to have the following prerequisites in order to initialize the module:

Following are the high-level steps for initializing the YubiKey device and generating the certificate that is signed by AWS Private Certificate Authority (AWS Private CA). Note that you could also use your own public key infrastructure (PKI) and register it with IAM Roles Anywhere.

To initialize the module and generate a certificate

  1. Verify that the YubiKey PIV interface is enabled, because some organizations might disable interfaces that are not being used. To do so, run the YubiKey Manager CLI, as follows:
    ykman info

    The output should look like the following, with the PIV interface enabled for USB.

    Figure 2:YubiKey Manager CLI showing that the PIV interface is enabled

    Figure 2:YubiKey Manager CLI showing that the PIV interface is enabled

  2. Use the YubiKey Manager CLI to generate a new RSA2048 private key on the security module in slot 9a and store the associated public key in a file. Different slots are available on YubiKey, and we will use the slot 9a that is for PIV authentication purpose. Use the following command to generate an asymmetric key pair. The private key is generated on the YubiKey, and the generated public key is saved as a file. Enter the YubiKey management key to proceed:
    ykman ‐‐device 123456 piv keys generate 9a pub-yubi.key

  3. Create a certificate request (CSR) based on the public key and specify the subject that will identify your server. Enter the user PIN code when prompted.
    ykman --device 123456 piv certificates request 9a --subject 'CN=server1-demo,O=Example,L=Boston,ST=MA,C=US' pub-yubi.key csr.pem

  4. Submit the certificate request to AWS Private CA to obtain the certificate signed by the CA.
    aws acm-pca issue-certificate \
    --certificate-authority-arn arn:aws:acm-pca:<region>:<accountID>:certificate-authority/<ca-id> \
    --csr fileb://csr.pem \
    --signing-algorithm "SHA256WITHRSA" \
    --validity Value=365,Type="DAYS"

  5. Copy the certificate Amazon Resource Number (ARN), which should look as follows in your clipboard:
    {
    "CertificateArn": "arn:aws:acm-pca:<region>:<accountID>:certificate-authority/<ca-id>/certificate/<certificate-id>"
    }

  6. Export the new certificate from AWS Private CA in a certificate.pem file.
    aws acm-pca get-certificate \
    --certificate-arn arn:aws:acm-pca:<region>:<accountID>:certificate-authority/<ca-id>/certificate/<certificate-id> \
    --certificate-authority-arn arn:aws:acm-pca: <region>:<accountID>:certificate-authority/<ca-id> \
    --query Certificate \
    --output text > certificate.pem

  7. Import the certificate file on the module by using the YubiKey Manager CLI or through the YubiKey Manager UI. Enter the YubiKey management key to proceed.
    ykman --device 123456 piv certificates import 9a certificate.pem

The security module is now initialized and can be plugged into the server.

Configuration to use the security module for programmatic access

The following steps will demonstrate how to configure the server to interact with the AWS CLI and AWS SDKs by using the private key stored on the YubiKey or PKCS #11–compatible device.

To use the YubiKey module with credential helper

  1. Download the credential helper tool for IAM Roles Anywhere for your operating system.
  2. Install the p11-kit package. Most providers (including opensc) will ship with a p11-kit “module” file that makes them discoverable. Users shouldn’t need to specify the PKCS #11 “provider” library when using the credential helper, because we use p11-kit by default.

    If your device library is not supported by p11-kit, you can install that library separately.

  3. Verify the content of the YubiKey by using the following command:
    ykman --device 123456 piv info

    The output should look like the following.

    Figure 3: YubiKey Manager CLI output for the PIV information

    Figure 3: YubiKey Manager CLI output for the PIV information

    This command provides the general status of the PIV application and content in the different slots such as the certificates installed.

  4. Use the credential helper command with the security module. The command will require at least:
    • The ARN of the trust anchor
    • The ARN of the target role to assume
    • The ARN of the profile to pull policies from
    • The certificate and/or key identifiers in the form of a PKCS #11 URI

You can use the certificate flag to search which slot on the security module contains the private key associated with the user certificate.

To specify an object stored in a cryptographic module, you should use the PKCS #11 URI that is defined in RFC7512. The attributes in the identifier string are a set of search criteria used to filter a set of objects. See a recommended method of locating objects in PKCS #11.

In the following example, we search for an object of type certificate, with the object label as “Certificate for Digital Signature”, in slot 1. The pin-value attribute allows you to directly use the pin to log into the cryptographic device.

pkcs11:type=cert;object=Certificate%20for%20Digital%20Signature;id=%01?pin-value=123456

From the folder where you have installed the credential helper tool, use the following command. Because we only have one certificate on the device, we can limit the filter to the certificate type in our PKCS #11 URI.

./aws_signing_helper credential-process
--profile-arn arn:aws:rolesanywhere:<region>:<accountID>:profile/<profileID>
--role-arn arn:aws:iam::<accountID>:role/<assumedRole> 
--trust-anchor-arn arn:aws:rolesanywhere:<region>:<accountID>:trust-anchor/<trustanchorID>
--certificate pkcs11:type=cert?pin-value=<PIN>

If everything is configured correctly, the credential helper tool will return a JSON that contains the credentials, as follows. The PIN code will be requested if you haven’t specified it in the command.

Please enter your user PIN:
  			{
                    "Version":1,
                    "AccessKeyId": <String>,
                    "SecretAccessKey": <String>,
                    "SessionToken": <String>,
                    "Expiration": <Timestamp>
                 }

To use temporary security credentials with AWS SDKs and the AWS CLI, you can configure the credential helper tool as a credential process. For more information, see Source credentials with an external process. The following example shows a config file (usually in ~/.aws/config) that sets the helper tool as the credential process.

[profile server1-demo]
credential_process = ./aws_signing_helper credential-process --profile-arn <arn-for-iam-roles-anywhere-profile> --role-arn <arn-for-iam-role-to-assume> --trust-anchor-arn <arn-for-roles-anywhere-trust-anchor> --certificate pkcs11:type=cert?pin-value=<PIN> 

You can provide the PIN as part of the credential command with the option pin-value=<PIN> so that the user input is not required.

If you prefer not to store your PIN in the config file, you can remove the attribute pin-value. In that case, you will be prompted to enter the PIN for every CLI command.

You can use the serve and update commands of the credential helper mentioned in the solution overview to manage credential rotation for unattended workloads. After the successful use of the PIN, the credential helper will store it in memory for the duration of the process and not ask for it anymore.

Auditability and fine-grained access

You can audit the activity of servers that are assuming roles through IAM Roles Anywhere. IAM Roles Anywhere is integrated with AWS CloudTrail, a service that provides a record of actions taken by a user, role, or an AWS service in IAM Roles Anywhere.

To view IAM Roles Anywhere activity in CloudTrail

  1. In the AWS CloudTrail console, in the left navigation menu, choose Event history.
  2. For Lookup attributes, filter by Event source and enter rolesanywhere.amazonaws.com in the textbox. You will find all the API calls that relate to IAM Roles Anywhere, including the CreateSession API call that returns temporary security credentials for workloads that have been authenticated with IAM Roles Anywhere to access AWS resources.
    Figure 4: CloudTrail Events filtered on the “IAM Roles Anywhere” event source

    Figure 4: CloudTrail Events filtered on the “IAM Roles Anywhere” event source

  3. When you review the CreateSession event record details, you can find the assumed role ID in the form of <PrincipalID>:<serverCertificateSerial>, as in the following example:
    Figure 5: Details of the CreateSession event in the CloudTrail console showing which role is being assumed

    Figure 5: Details of the CreateSession event in the CloudTrail console showing which role is being assumed

  4. If you want to identify API calls made by a server, for Lookup attributes, filter by User name, and enter the serverCertificateSerial value from the previous step in the textbox.
    Figure 6: CloudTrail console events filtered by the username associated to our certificate on the security module

    Figure 6: CloudTrail console events filtered by the username associated to our certificate on the security module

    The API calls to AWS services made with the temporary credentials acquired through IAM Roles Anywhere will contain the identity of the server that made the call in the SourceIdentity field. For example, the EC2 DescribeInstances API call provides the following details:

    Figure 7: The event record in the CloudTrail console for the EC2 describe instances call, with details on the assumed role and certificate CN.

    Figure 7: The event record in the CloudTrail console for the EC2 describe instances call, with details on the assumed role and certificate CN.

Additionally, you can include conditions in the identity policy for the IAM role to apply fine-grained access control. This will allow you to apply a fine-grained access control filter to specify which server in the group of servers can perform the action.

To apply access control per server within the same IAM Roles Anywhere profile

  1. In the IAM Roles Anywhere console, select the profile used by the group of servers, then select one of the roles that is being assumed.
  2. Apply the following policy, which will allow only the server with CN=server1-demo to list all buckets by using the condition on aws:SourceIdentity.
    {
      "Version":"2012-10-17",
      "Statement":[
        {
                "Sid": "VisualEditor0",
                "Effect": "Allow",
                "Action": "s3:ListBuckets",
                "Resource": "*",
                "Condition": {
                    "StringEquals": {
                        "aws:SourceIdentity": "CN=server1-demo"
                    }
                }
            }
      ]
    }

Conclusion

In this blog post, I’ve demonstrated how you can use the YubiKey 5 Series (or any PKCS #11 cryptographic module) to securely store the private keys for the X.509 certificates used with IAM Roles Anywhere. I’ve also highlighted how you can use AWS CloudTrail to audit API actions performed by the roles assumed by the servers.

To learn more about IAM Roles Anywhere, see the IAM Roles Anywhere and Credential Helper tool documentation. For configuration with Thales IDPrime smart card, review the credential helper for IAM Roles Anywhere GitHub page.

If you have feedback about this post, submit comments in the Comments section below. If you have questions about this post, start a new thread on the AWS Identity and Access Management re:Post or contact AWS Support.

Want more AWS Security news? Follow us on Twitter.

Author

Edouard Kachelmann

Edouard is an Enterprise Senior Solutions Architect at Amazon Web Services. Based in Boston, he is a passionate technology enthusiast who enjoys working with customers and helping them build innovative solutions to deliver measurable business outcomes. Prior to his work at AWS, Edouard worked for the French National Cybersecurity Agency, sharing his security expertise and assisting government departments and operators of vital importance. In his free time, Edouard likes to explore new places to eat, try new French recipes, and play with his kids.

Manage roles and entitlements with PBAC using Amazon Verified Permissions

Post Syndicated from Abhishek Panday original https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/devops/manage-roles-and-entitlements-with-pbac-using-amazon-verified-permissions/

Traditionally, customers have used role-based access control (RBAC) to manage entitlements within their applications. The application controls what users can do, based on the roles they are assigned. But, the drive for least privilege has led to an exponential growth in the number of roles. Customers can address this role explosion by moving authorization logic out of the application code, and implementing a policy-based access control (PBAC) model that augments RBAC with attribute-based access control (ABAC).

In this blog post, we cover roles and entitlements, how they are applicable in apps authorization decisions, how customers implement roles and authorization in their app today, and how to shift to a centralized PBAC model by using Amazon Verified Permissions.

Describing roles and entitlements, approaches and challenges of current implementations

In RBAC models, a user’s entitlements are assigned based on job role. This role could be that of a developer, which might grant permissions to affect code in the pipeline of an app. Entitlements represent the features, functions, and resources a user has permissions to access. For example, a customer might be able to place orders or view pets in a pet store application, or a store owner might be entitled to review orders made from their store.

The combination of roles assigned to a user and entitlements granted to these roles determines what a human user can do within your application. Traditionally, application access has all been handled in code by hard coding roles that users can be assigned and mapping those roles directly to a set of actions on resources. However, as the need to apply more granular access control grows (as with least privilege), so do the number of required hard-coded roles that are assigned to users to obtain this level of granularity. This problem is frequently called role explosion, where role definitions grow exponentially which requires additional overhead from your teams to manage and audit roles effectively. For example, the code to authorize request to get details of an order has multiple if/else statements, as shown in the following sample.


boolean userAuthorizedForOrder (Order order, User user){
    if (user.storeId == user.storeID) {
        if (user.roles.contains("store-owner-roles") {            // store owners can only access orders for their own stores  
            return true; 
        } else if (user.roles.contains("store-employee")) {
            if (isStoreOpen(current_time)) {                      // Only allow access for the order to store-employees when
                return true                                       // store is open 
            }
        }
    } else {
        if (user.roles("customer-service-associate") &amp;&amp;           // Only allow customer service associates to orders for cases 
                user.assignedShift(current_time)) &amp;&amp;              // they are assinged and only during their assigned shift
                user.currentCase.order.orderId == order.orderId
         return true;
    }
    return false; 
}

This problem introduces several challenges. First, figuring out why a permission was granted or denied requires a closer look at the code. Second, adding a permission requires code changes. Third, audits can be difficult because you either have to run a battery of tests or explore code across multiple files to demonstrate access controls to auditors. Though there might be additional considerations, these three challenges have led many app owners to begin looking at PBAC methods to address the granularity problem. You can read more about the foundations of PBAC models in Policy-based access control in application development with Amazon Verified Permissions. By shifting to a PBAC model, you can reduce role growth to meet your fine-grained permissions needs. You can also externalize authorization logic from code, develop granular permissions based on roles and attributes, and reduce the time that you spend refactoring code for changes to authorization decisions or reading through the code to audit authorization logic.

In this blog, we demonstrate implementing permissions in a PBAC model through a demo application. The demo application uses Cognito groups to manage role assignment, Verified Permissions to implement entitlements for the roles. The approach restricts the resources that a role can access using attribute-based conditions. This approach works well in usecases when you already have a system in place to manage role assignment and you can define resources that a user may access by matching attributes of the user with attributes of the resource.

Demo app

Let’s look at a sample pet store app. The app is used by 2 types of users – end users and store owners. The app enables end users to search and order pets. The app allows store owners to list orders for the store. This sample app is available for download and local testing on the aws-samples/avp-petstore-sample Github repository. The app is a web app built by using AWS Amplify, Amazon API-Gateway, Amazon Cognito, and Amazon Verified Permissions. The following diagram is a high-level illustration of the app’s architecture.

Architectural Diagram

Steps

  1. The user logs in to the application, and is re-directed to Amazon Cognito to sign-in and obtain a JWT token.
  2. When user take an action (eg. ListOrders) in the application, the application calls Amazon API-Gateway to process the request.
  3. Amazon API-Gateway forwards the request to a lambda function, that call Amazon Verified Permissions to authorize the action. If the authorization results in deny, the lambda returns Unauthorized back to the application.
  4. If the authorization succeed, the application continues to execute the action.

RBAC policies in action

In this section, we focus on building RBAC permissions for the sample pet store app. We will guide you through building RBAC by using Verified Permissions and by focusing on a role for store owners, who are allowed to view all orders for a store. We use Verified Permissions to manage the permissions granted to this role and Amazon Cognito to manage role assignments.

We model the store owner role in Amazon Cognito as a user group called Store-Owner-Role. When a user is assigned the store owner role, the user is added to the “Store-Owner-Role” user group. You can create the users and users groups required to follow along with the sample application by visiting managing users and groups in Amazon Cognito.

After users are assigned to the store owner role, you can enforce that they can list all orders in the store by using the following RBAC policy. The policy provides access to any user in the Store-Owner-Role to perform the ListOrders and GetStoreInventory actions on any resource.

permit (
         principal in MyApplication::Group::"Store-Owner-Role",
         action in [
              MyApplication::Action::"GetStoreInventory",
              MyApplication::Action::"ListOrders"
         ],
         resource
);

Based on the policy we reviewed – the store owner will receive a Success! when they attempt to list existing orders.

Eve is permitted to list orders

This example further demonstrates the division of responsibility between the identity provider (Amazon Cognito) and Verified Permissions. The identity provider (IdP) is responsible for managing roles and memberships in roles. Verified Permissions is responsible for managing policies that describe what those roles are permitted to do. As demonstrated above, you can use this process to add roles without needing to change code.

Using PBAC to help reduce role explosion

Up until the point of role explosion, RBAC has worked well as the sole authorization model. Unfortunately, we have heard from customers that this model does not scale well because of the challenge of role explosion. Role explosion happens when you have hundreds or thousands of roles, and managing and auditing those roles becomes challenging. In extreme cases, you might have more roles than the number of users in your organization. This happens primarily because organizations keep creating more roles, with each role granting access to a smaller set of resources in an effort to follow the principle of least privilege.

Let’s understand the problem of role explosion through our sample pet store app. The pet store app is now being sold as a SaaS product to pet stores in other locations. As a result, the app needs additional access controls to ensure that each store owner can view only the orders from their own store. The most intuitive way to implement these access controls was to create an additional role for each location, which would restrict the scope of access for a store owner to their respective store’s orders. For example, a role named petstore-austin would allow access only to resources in the Austin, Texas store. RBAC models allow developers to predefine sets of permissions that can be used in an application, and ABAC models allow developers to adapt those permissions to the context of the request (such as the client, the resource, and the method used). The adoption of both RBAC and ABAC models leads to an explosion of either roles or attribute-based rules as the number of store locations increases.

To solve this problem, you can combine RBAC and ABAC policies into a PBAC model. RBAC policies determines the actions the user can take. Augmenting these policies with ABAC policies allows you to control the resouces they can take those actions on. For example, you can scope down the resources a user can access based on identity attributes, such as department or business unit, region, and management level. This approach mitigates role explosion because you need to have only a small number of predefined roles, and access is controlled based on attributes. You can use Verified Permissions to combine RBAC and ABAC models in the form of Cedar policies to build this PBAC solution.

We can demonstrate this solution in the sample pet store app by modifying the policy we created earlier and adding ABAC conditions. The conditions specify that users can only ListOrders of the store they own. The store a store owner owns is represented in Amazon Cognito by employmentStoreCode. This policy now expands on the granularity of access of the original RBAC policy without leading to numerous RBAC policies.

permit (
         principal in MyApplication::Group::"Store-Owner-Role",
         action in [
              MyApplication::Action::"GetStoreInventory",
              MyApplication::Action::"ListOrders"
          ],
          resource
) when { 
          principal.employmentStoreCode == resource.storeId 
};

We demonstrate that our policy restricts access for store owners to the store they own, by creating a user – eve – who is assigned the Store-Owner-Role and owns petstore-london. When Eve lists orders for the petstore-london store, she gets a success response, indicating she has permissions to list orders.
Eve is permitted to list orders for petstore-london

Next, when even tries to list orders for the petstore-seattle store, she gets a Not Authorized response. She is denied access as she does not own petstore-seattle.

Eve is not permitted to list orders for petstore-seattle

Step-by-step walkthrough of trying the Demo App

If you want to go through the demo of our sample pet store app, we recommend forking it from aws-samples/avp-petstore-sample Github repo and going through this process in README.md to ensure hands-on familiarity.

We will first walk through setting up permissions using only RBAC for the sample pet store application. Next, we will see how you can use PBAC to implement least priveledge as the application scales.

Implement RBAC based Permissions

We describe setting up policies to implement entitlements for the store owner role in Verified Permissions.

    1. Navigate to the AWS Management Console, search for Verified Permissions, and select the service to go to the service page.
    2. Create new policy store to create a container for your policies. You can create an Empty Policy Store for the purpose of the walk-through.
    3. Navigate to Policies in the navigation pane and choose Create static policy.
    4. Select Next and paste in the following Cedar policy and select Save.
permit (
        principal in MyApplication::Group::"Store-Owner-Role",
        action in [
               MyApplication::Action::"GetStoreInventory",
               MyApplication::Action::"ListOrders"
         ],
         resource
);
  1. You need to get users and assign the Store-Owner-Role to them. In this case, you will use Amazon Cognito as the IdP and the role can be assigned there. You can create users and groups in Cognito by following the below steps.
    1. Navigate to Amazon Cognito from the AWS Management Console, and select the user group created for the pet store app.
    2. Creating a user by clicking create user and create a user with user name eve
    3. Navigate to the Groups section and create a group called Store-Owner-Role .
    4. Add eve to the Store-Owner-Role group by clicking Add user to Group, selecting eve and clicking the Add.
  2. Now that you have assigned the Store-Owner-Role to the user, and Verified Permissions has a permit policy granting entitlements based on role membership, you can log in to the application as the user – eve – to test functionality. When choosing List All Orders, you can see the approval result in the app’s output.

Implement PBAC based Permissions

As the company grows, you want to be able to limit GetOrders access to a specific store location so that you can follow least privilege. You can update your policy to PBAC by adding an ABAC condition to the existing permit policy. You can add a condition in the policy that restricts listing orders to only those stores the user owns.

Below is the walk-though of updating the application

    1. Navigate to the Verified Permissions console and update the policy to the below.
permit (
         principal in MyApplication::Group::"Store-Owner-Role",
         action in [
              MyApplication::Action::"GetStoreInventory",
              MyApplication::Action::"ListOrders"
          ],
          resource
) when { 
          principal.employmentStoreCode == resource.storeId 
};
  1. Navigate to the Amazon Cognito console, select the user eve and click “Edit” in the user attributes section to update the “custom:employmentStoreCode”. Set the attribute value to “petstore-london” as eve owns the petstore-london location
  2. You can demonstrate that eve can only list orders of “petstore-london” by following the below steps
    1. We want to make sure that latest changes to the user attributed are passed to the application in the identity token. We will refresh the identity token, by logging out of the app and logging in again as Eve. Navigate back to the application and logout as eve.
    2. In the application, we set the Pet Store Identifier as petstore-london and click the List All Orders. The result is success!, as Eve is authorized to list orders of the store she owns.
    3. Next, we change the Pet Store Identifier to petstore-seattle and and click the List All Orders. The result is Not Authorized, as Eve is authorized to list orders of stores she does not owns.

Clean Up section

You can cleanup the resources that were created in this blog by following these steps.

Conclusion

In this post, we reviewed what roles and entitlements are as well as how they are used to manage user authorization in your app. We’ve also covered RBAC and ABAC policy examples with respect to the demo application, avp-petstore-sample, that is available to you via AWS Samples for hands-on testing. The walk-through also covered our example architecture using Amazon Cognito as the IdP and Verified Permissions as the centralized policy store that assessed authorization results based on the policies set for the app. By leveraging Verified Permissions, we could use PBAC model to define fine-grained access while preventing role explosion. For more information about Verified Permissions, see the Amazon Verified Permissions product details page and Resources page.

Abhishek Panday

Abhishek is a product manager in the Amazon Verified Permissions team. He has been working with the AWS for more than two years, and has been at Amazon for more than five years. Abhishek enjoys working with customers to understand the customer’s challenges and building products to solve those challenges. Abhishek currently lives in Seattle and enjoys playing soccer, hiking, and cooking Indian cuisines.

Jeremy Ware

Jeremy is a Security Specialist Solutions Architect focused on Identity and Access Management. Jeremy and his team enable AWS customers to implement sophisticated, scalable, and secure IAM architecture and Authentication workflows to solve business challenges. With a background in Security Engineering, Jeremy has spent many years working to raise the Security Maturity gap at numerous global enterprises. Outside of work, Jeremy loves to explore the mountainous outdoors participate in sports such as Snowboarding, Wakeboarding, and Dirt bike riding.

AWS achieves HDS certification in two additional Regions

Post Syndicated from Janice Leung original https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/security/aws-achieves-hds-certification-in-two-additional-regions-2/

Amazon Web Services (AWS) is pleased to announce that two additional AWS Regions—Middle East (UAE) and Europe (Zurich)—have been granted the Health Data Hosting (Hébergeur de Données de Santé, HDS) certification, increasing the scope to 20 global AWS Regions.

The Agence Française de la Santé Numérique (ASIP Santé), the French governmental agency for health, introduced the HDS certification to strengthen the security and protection of personal health data. By achieving this certification, AWS demonstrates our commitment to adhere to the heightened expectations for cloud service providers.

The following 20 Regions are in scope for this certification:

  • US East (Ohio)
  • US East (Northern Virginia)
  • US West (Northern California)
  • US West (Oregon)
  • Asia Pacific (Jakarta)
  • Asia Pacific (Seoul)
  • Asia Pacific (Mumbai)
  • Asia Pacific (Singapore)
  • Asia Pacific (Sydney)
  • Asia Pacific (Tokyo)
  • Canada (Central)
  • Europe (Frankfurt)
  • Europe (Ireland)
  • Europe (London)
  • Europe (Milan)
  • Europe (Paris)
  • Europe (Stockholm)
  • Europe (Zurich)
  • Middle East (UAE)
  • South America (São Paulo)

The HDS certification demonstrates that AWS provides a framework for technical and governance measures that secure and protect personal health data, governed by French law. Our customers who handle personal health data can continue to manage their workloads in HDS-certified Regions with confidence.

Independent third-party auditors evaluated and certified AWS on September 8, 2023. The Certificate of Compliance demonstrating AWS compliance status is available on the Agence du Numérique en Santé (ANS) website and AWS Artifact. AWS Artifact is a self-service portal for on-demand access to AWS compliance reports. Sign in to AWS Artifact in the AWS Management Console, or learn more at Getting Started with AWS Artifact.

For up-to-date information, including when additional Regions are added, see the AWS Compliance Programs page and choose HDS.

AWS strives to continuously meet your architectural and regulatory needs. If you have questions or feedback about HDS compliance, reach out to your AWS account team.

To learn more about our compliance and security programs, see AWS Compliance Programs. As always, we value your feedback and questions; reach out to the AWS Compliance team through the Contact Us page.

If you have feedback about this post, submit comments in the Comments section below.

Want more AWS Security news? Follow us on Twitter.

Author

Janice Leung

Janice is a Security Assurance Audit Program Manager at AWS, based in New York. She leads security audits across Europe and previously worked in security assurance and technology risk management in the financial industry for 11 years.

Access accounts with AWS Management Console Private Access

Post Syndicated from Suresh Samuel original https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/security/access-accounts-with-aws-management-console-private-access/

AWS Management Console Private Access is an advanced security feature to help you control access to the AWS Management Console. In this post, I will show you how this feature works, share current limitations, and provide AWS CloudFormation templates that you can use to automate the deployment. AWS Management Console Private Access is useful when you want to restrict users from signing in to unknown AWS accounts from within your network. With this feature, you can limit access to the console only to a specified set of known accounts when the traffic originates from within your network.

For enterprise customers, users typically access the console from devices that are connected to a corporate network, either directly or through a virtual private network (VPN). With network connectivity to the console, users can authenticate into an account with valid credentials, including third-party accounts and personal accounts. For enterprise customers with stringent network access controls, this feature provides a way to control which accounts can be accessed from on-premises networks.

How AWS Management Console Private Access works

AWS PrivateLink now supports the AWS Management Console, which means that you can create Virtual Private Cloud (VPC) endpoints in your VPC for the console. You can then use DNS forwarding to conditionally route users’ browser traffic to the VPC endpoints from on-premises and define endpoint policies that allow or deny access to specific accounts, organizations, or organizational units (OUs). To privately reach the endpoints, you must have a hybrid network connection between on-premises and AWS over AWS Direct Connect or AWS Site-to-Site VPN.

When you conditionally forward DNS queries for the zone aws.amazon.com from on-premises to an Amazon Route 53 Resolver inbound endpoint within the VPC, Route 53 will prefer the private hosted zone for aws.amazon.com to resolve the queries. The private hosted zone makes it simple to centrally manage records for the console in the AWS US East (N. Virginia) Region (us-east-1) as well as other Regions.

Configure a VPC endpoint for the console

To configure VPC endpoints for the console, you must complete the following steps:

  1. Create interface VPC endpoints in a VPC in the US East (N. Virginia) Region for the console and sign-in services. Repeat for other desired Regions. You must create VPC endpoints in the US East (N. Virginia) Region because the default DNS name for the console resolves to this Region. Specify the accounts, organizations, or OUs that should be allowed or denied in the endpoint policies. For instructions on how to create interface VPC endpoints, see Access an AWS service using an interface VPC endpoint.
  2. Create a Route 53 Resolver inbound endpoint in a VPC and note the IP addresses for the elastic network interfaces of the endpoint. Forward DNS queries for the console from on-premises to these IP addresses. For instructions on how to configure Route 53 Resolver, see Getting started with Route 53 Resolver.
  3. Create a Route 53 private hosted zone with records for the console and sign-in subdomains. For the full list of records needed, see DNS configuration for AWS Management Console and AWS Sign-In. Then associate the private hosted zone with the same VPC that has the Resolver inbound endpoint. For instructions on how to create a private hosted zone, see Creating a private hosted zone.
  4. Conditionally forward DNS queries for aws.amazon.com to the IP addresses of the Resolver inbound endpoint.

How to access Regions other than US East (N. Virginia)

To access the console for another supported Region using AWS Management Console Private Access, complete the following steps:

  1. Create the console and sign-in VPC endpoints in a VPC in that Region.
  2. Create resource records for <region>.console.aws.amazon.com and <region>.signin.aws.amazon.com in the private hosted zone, with values that target the respective VPC endpoints in that Region. Replace <region> with the region code (for example, us-west-2).

For increased resiliency, you can also configure a second Resolver inbound endpoint in a different Region other than the US East (N. Virginia) Region (us-east-1). On-premises DNS resolvers can use both endpoints for resilient DNS resolution to the private hosted zone.

Automate deployment of AWS Management Console Private Access

I created an AWS CloudFormation template that you can use to deploy the required resources in the US East (N. Virginia) Region (us-east-1). To get the template, go to console-endpoint-use1.yaml. The CloudFormation stack deploys the required VPC endpoints, Route 53 Resolver inbound endpoint, and private hosted zone with required records.

Note: The default endpoint policy allows all accounts. For sample policies with conditions to restrict access, see Allow AWS Management Console use for expected accounts and organizations only (trusted identities).

I also created a CloudFormation template that you can use to deploy the required resources in other Regions where private access to the console is required. To get the template, go to console-endpoint-non-use1.yaml.

Cost considerations

When you configure AWS Management Console Private Access, you will incur charges. You can use the following information to estimate these charges:

  • PrivateLink pricing is based on the number of hours that the VPC endpoints remain provisioned. In the US East (N. Virginia) Region, this is $0.01 per VPC endpoint per Availability Zone ($/hour).
  • Data processing charges per gigabyte (GB) of data processed through the VPC endpoints is $0.01 in the US East (N. Virginia) Region.
  • The Route 53 Resolver inbound endpoint is charged per IP (elastic network interface) per hour. In the US East (N. Virginia) Region, this is $0.125 per IP address per hour. See Route 53 pricing.
  • DNS queries to the inbound endpoint are charged at $0.40 per million queries.
  • The Route 53 hosted zone is charged at $0.50 per hosted zone per month. To allow testing, AWS won’t charge you for a hosted zone that you delete within 12 hours of creation.

Based on this pricing model, the cost of configuring AWS Management Console Private Access in the US East (N. Virginia) Region in two Availability Zones is approximately $212.20 per month for the deployed resources. DNS queries and data processing charges are additional based on actual usage. You can also apply this pricing model to help estimate the cost to configure in additional supported Regions. Route 53 is a global service, so you only have to create the private hosted zone once along with the resources in the US East (N. Virginia) Region.

Limitations and considerations

Before you get started with AWS Management Console Private Access, make sure to review the following limitations and considerations:

  • For a list of supported Regions and services, see Supported AWS Regions, service consoles, and features.
  • You can use this feature to restrict access to specific accounts from customer networks by forwarding DNS queries to the VPC endpoints. This feature doesn’t prevent users from accessing the console directly from the internet by using the console’s public endpoints from devices that aren’t on the corporate network.
  • The following subdomains aren’t currently supported by this feature and won’t be accessible through private access:
    • docs.aws.amazon.com
    • health.aws.amazon.com
    • status.aws.amazon.com
  • After a user completes authentication and accesses the console with private access, when they navigate to an individual service console, for example Amazon Elastic Compute Cloud (Amazon EC2), they must have network connectivity to the service’s API endpoint, such as ec2.amazonaws.com. This is needed for the console to make API calls such as ec2:DescribeInstances to display resource details in the service console.

Conclusion

In this blog post, I outlined how you can configure the console through AWS Management Console Private Access to restrict access to AWS accounts from on-premises, how the feature works, and how to configure it for multiple Regions. I also provided CloudFormation templates that you can use to automate the configuration of this feature. Finally, I shared information on costs and some limitations that you should consider before you configure private access to the console.

For more information about how to set up and test AWS Management Console Private Access and reference architectures, see Try AWS Management Console Private Access. For the latest CloudFormation templates, see the aws-management-console-private-access-automation GitHub repository.

If you have feedback about this post, submit comments in the Comments section below. If you have questions about this post, start a new thread at re:Post.

Want more AWS Security news? Follow us on Twitter.

Suresh Samuel

Suresh Samuel

Suresh is a Senior Technical Account Manager at AWS. He helps customers in the financial services industry with their operations on AWS. When not working, he can be found photographing birds in Texas or hanging out with his kids.

Understanding DDoS Simulation Testing in AWS

Post Syndicated from Harith Gaddamanugu original https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/security/understanding-ddos-simulation-testing-at-aws/

Distributed denial of service (DDoS) events occur when a threat actor sends traffic floods from multiple sources to disrupt the availability of a targeted application. DDoS simulation testing uses a controlled DDoS event to allow the owner of an application to assess the application’s resilience and practice event response. DDoS simulation testing is permitted on Amazon Web Services (AWS), subject to Testing policy terms and conditions. In this blog post, we help you understand when it’s appropriate to perform a DDoS simulation test on an application running on AWS, and what options you have for running the test.

DDoS protection at AWS

Security is the top priority at AWS. AWS services include basic DDoS protection as a standard feature to help protect customers from the most common and frequently occurring infrastructure (layer 3 and 4) DDoS events, such as SYN/UDP floods, reflection attacks, and others. While this protection is designed to protect the availability of AWS infrastructure, your application might require more nuanced protections that consider your traffic patterns and integrate with your internal reporting and incident response processes. If you need more nuanced protection, then you should consider subscribing to AWS Shield Advanced in addition to the native resiliency offered by the AWS services you use.

AWS Shield Advanced is a managed service that helps you protect your application against external threats, like DDoS events, volumetric bots, and vulnerability exploitation attempts. When you subscribe to Shield Advanced and add protection to your resources, Shield Advanced provides expanded DDoS event protection for those resources. With advanced protections enabled on your resources, you get tailored detection based on the traffic patterns of your application, assistance with protecting against Layer 7 DDoS events, access to 24×7 specialized support from the Shield Response Team (SRT), access to centralized management of security policies through AWS Firewall Manager, and cost protections to help safeguard against scaling charges resulting from DDoS-related usage spikes. You can also configure AWS WAF (a web application firewall) to integrate with Shield Advanced to create custom layer 7 firewall rules and enable automatic application layer DDoS mitigation.

Acceptable DDoS simulation use cases on AWS

AWS is constantly learning and innovating by delivering new DDoS protection capabilities, which are explained in the DDoS Best Practices whitepaper. This whitepaper provides an overview of DDoS events and the choices that you can make when building on AWS to help you architect your application to absorb or mitigate volumetric events. If your application is architected according to our best practices, then a DDoS simulation test might not be necessary, because these architectures have been through rigorous internal AWS testing and verified as best practices for customers to use.

Using DDoS simulations to explore the limits of AWS infrastructure isn’t a good use case for these tests. Similarly, validating if AWS is effectively protecting its side of the shared responsibility model isn’t a good test motive. Further, using AWS resources as a source to simulate a DDoS attack on other AWS resources isn’t encouraged. Load tests are performed to gain reliable information on application performance under stress and these are different from DDoS tests. For more information, see the Amazon Elastic Compute Cloud (Amazon EC2) testing policy and penetration testing. Application owners, who have a security compliance requirement from a regulator or who want to test the effectiveness of their DDoS mitigation strategies, typically run DDoS simulation tests.

DDoS simulation tests at AWS

AWS offers two options for running DDoS simulation tests. They are:

  • A simulated DDoS attack in production traffic with an authorized pre-approved AWS Partner.
  • A synthetic simulated DDoS attack with the SRT, also referred to as a firedrill.

The motivation for DDoS testing varies from application to application and these engagements don’t offer the same value to all customers. Establishing clear motives for the test can help you choose the right option. If you want to test your incident response strategy, we recommend scheduling a firedrill with our SRT. If you want to test the Shield Advanced features or test application resiliency, we recommend that you work with an AWS approved partner.

DDoS simulation testing with an AWS Partner

AWS DDoS test partners are authorized to conduct DDoS simulation tests on customers’ behalf without prior approval from AWS. Customers can currently contact the following partners to set up these paid engagements:

Before contacting the partners, customers must agree to the terms and conditions for DDoS simulation tests. The application must be well-architected prior to DDoS simulation testing as described in AWS DDoS Best Practices whitepaper. AWS DDoS test partners that want to perform DDoS simulation tests that don’t comply with the technical restrictions set forth in our public DDoS testing policy, or other DDoS test vendors that aren’t approved, can request approval to perform DDoS simulation tests by submitting the DDoS Simulation Testing form at least 14 days before the proposed test date. For questions, please send an email to [email protected].

After choosing a test partner, customers go through various phases of testing. Typically, the first phase involves a discovery discussion, where the customer defines clear goals, assembles technical details, and defines the test schedule with the partner. In the next phase, partners run multiple simulations based on agreed attack vectors, duration, diversity of the attack vectors, and other factors. These tests are usually carried out by slowly ramping up traffic levels from low levels to desired high levels with an ability for an emergency stop. The final stage involves reporting, discussing observed gaps, identifying actionable tasks, and driving those tasks to completion.

These engagements are typically long-term, paid contracts that are planned over months and carried out over weeks, with results analyzed over time. These tests and reports are beneficial to customers who need to evaluate detection and mitigation capabilities on a large scale. If you’re an application owner and want to evaluate the DDoS resiliency of your application, practice event response with real traffic, or have a DDoS compliance or regulation requirement, we recommend this type of engagement. These tests aren’t recommended if you want to learn the volumetric breaking points of the AWS network or understand when AWS starts to throttle requests. AWS services are designed to scale, and when certain dynamic volume thresholds are exceeded, AWS detection systems will be invoked to block traffic. Lastly, it’s critical to distinguish between these tests and stress tests, in which meaningful packets are sent to the application to assess its behavior.

DDoS firedrill testing with the Shield Response Team

Shield Advanced service offers additional assistance through the SRT, this team can also help with testing incident response workflows. Customers can contact the SRT and request firedrill testing. Firedrill testing is a type of synthetic test that doesn’t generate real volumetric traffic but does post a shield event to the requesting customer’s account.

These tests are available for customers who are already on-boarded to Shield Advanced and want to test their Amazon CloudWatch alarms by invoking a DDoSDetected metric, or test their proactive engagement setup or their custom incident response strategy. Because this event isn’t based on real traffic, the customer won’t see traffic generated on their account or see logs that drive helpful reports.

These tests are intended to generate associated Shield Advanced metrics and post a DDoS event for a customer resource. For example, SRT can post a 14 Gbps UDP mock attack on a protected resource for about 15 minutes and customers can test their response capability during such an event.

Note: Not all attack vectors and AWS resource types are supported for a firedrill. Shield Advanced onboarded customers can contact AWS Support teams to request assistance with running a firedrill or understand more about them.

Conclusion

DDoS simulations and incident response testing on AWS through the SRT or an AWS Partner are useful in improving application security controls, identifying Shield Advanced misconfigurations, optimizing existing detection systems, and improving incident readiness. The goal of these engagements is to help you build a DDoS resilient architecture to protect your application’s availability. However, these engagements don’t offer the same value to all customers. Most customers can obtain similar benefits by following AWS Best Practices for DDoS Resiliency. AWS recommends architecting your application according to DDoS best practices and fine tuning AWS Shield Advanced out-of-the-box offerings to your application needs to improve security posture.

 
If you have feedback about this post, submit comments in the Comments section below. If you have questions about this post, contact AWS Support.

Want more AWS Security news? Follow us on Twitter.

Harith Gaddamanugu

Harith Gaddamanugu

Harith works at AWS as a Sr. Edge Specialist Solutions Architect. He stays motivated by solving problems for customers across AWS Perimeter Protection and Edge services. When he is not working, he enjoys spending time outdoors with friends and family.

Automatically detect and block low-volume network floods

Post Syndicated from Bryan Van Hook original https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/security/automatically-detect-and-block-low-volume-network-floods/

In this blog post, I show you how to deploy a solution that uses AWS Lambda to automatically manage the lifecycle of Amazon VPC Network Access Control List (ACL) rules to mitigate network floods detected using Amazon CloudWatch Logs Insights and Amazon Timestream.

Application teams should consider the impact unexpected traffic floods can have on an application’s availability. Internet-facing applications can be susceptible to traffic that some distributed denial of service (DDoS) mitigation systems can’t detect. For example, hit-and-run events are a popular approach that use short-lived floods that reoccur at random intervals. Each burst is small enough to go unnoticed by mitigation systems, but still occur often enough and are large enough to be disruptive. Automatically detecting and blocking temporary sources of invalid traffic, combined with other best practices, can strengthen the resiliency of your applications and maintain customer trust.

Use resilient architectures

AWS customers can use prescriptive guidance to improve DDoS resiliency by reviewing the AWS Best Practices for DDoS Resiliency. It describes a DDoS-resilient reference architecture as a guide to help you protect your application’s availability.

The best practices above address the needs of most AWS customers; however, in this blog we cover a few outlier examples that fall outside normal guidance. Here are a few examples that might describe your situation:

  • You need to operate functionality that isn’t yet fully supported by an AWS managed service that takes on the responsibility of DDoS mitigation.
  • Migrating to an AWS managed service such as Amazon Route 53 isn’t immediately possible and you need an interim solution that mitigates risks.
  • Network ingress must be allowed from a wide public IP space that can’t be restricted.
  • You’re using public IP addresses assigned from the Amazon pool of public IPv4 addresses (which can’t be protected by AWS Shield) rather than Elastic IP addresses.
  • The application’s technology stack has limited or no support for horizontal scaling to absorb traffic floods.
  • Your HTTP workload sits behind a Network Load Balancer and can’t be protected by AWS WAF.
  • Network floods are disruptive but not significant enough (too infrequent or too low volume) to be detected by your managed DDoS mitigation systems.

For these situations, VPC network ACLs can be used to deny invalid traffic. Normally, the limit on rules per network ACL makes them unsuitable for handling truly distributed network floods. However, they can be effective at mitigating network floods that aren’t distributed enough or large enough to be detected by DDoS mitigation systems.

Given the dynamic nature of network traffic and the limited size of network ACLs, it helps to automate the lifecycle of network ACL rules. In the following sections, I show you a solution that uses network ACL rules to automatically detect and block infrastructure layer traffic within 2–5 minutes and automatically removes the rules when they’re no longer needed.

Detecting anomalies in network traffic

You need a way to block disruptive traffic while not impacting legitimate traffic. Anomaly detection can isolate the right traffic to block. Every workload is unique, so you need a way to automatically detect anomalies in the workload’s traffic pattern. You can determine what is normal (a baseline) and then detect statistical anomalies that deviate from the baseline. This baseline can change over time, so it needs to be calculated based on a rolling window of recent activity.

Z-scores are a common way to detect anomalies in time-series data. The process for creating a Z-score is to first calculate the average and standard deviation (a measure of how much the values are spread out) across all values over a span of time. Then for each value in the time window calculate the Z-score as follows:

Z-score = (value – average) / standard deviation

A Z-score exceeding 3.0 indicates the value is an outlier that is greater than 99.7 percent of all other values.

To calculate the Z-score for detecting network anomalies, you need to establish a time series for network traffic. This solution uses VPC flow logs to capture information about the IP traffic in your VPC. Each VPC flow log record provides a packet count that’s aggregated over a time interval. Each flow log record aggregates the number of packets over an interval of 60 seconds or less. There isn’t a consistent time boundary for each log record. This means raw flow log records aren’t a predictable way to build a time series. To address this, the solution processes flow logs into packet bins for time series values. A packet bin is the number of packets sent by a unique source IP address within a specific time window. A source IP address is considered an anomaly if any of its packet bins over the past hour exceed the Z-score threshold (default is 3.0).

When overall traffic levels are low, there might be source IP addresses with a high Z-score that aren’t a risk. To mitigate against false positives, source IP addresses are only considered to be an anomaly if the packet bin exceeds a minimum threshold (default is 12,000 packets).

Let’s review the overall solution architecture.

Solution overview

This solution, shown in Figure 1, uses VPC flow logs to capture information about the traffic reaching the network interfaces in your public subnets. CloudWatch Logs Insights queries are used to summarize the most recent IP traffic into packet bins that are stored in Timestream. The time series table is queried to identify source IP addresses responsible for traffic that meets the anomaly threshold. Anomalous source IP addresses are published to an Amazon Simple Notification Service (Amazon SNS) topic. A Lambda function receives the SNS message and decides how to update the network ACL.

Figure 1: Automating the detection and mitigation of traffic floods using network ACLs

Figure 1: Automating the detection and mitigation of traffic floods using network ACLs

How it works

The numbered steps that follow correspond to the numbers in Figure 1.

  1. Capture VPC flow logs. Your VPC is configured to stream flow logs to CloudWatch Logs. To minimize cost, the flow logs are limited to particular subnets and only include log fields required by the CloudWatch query. When protecting an endpoint that spans multiple subnets (such as a Network Load Balancer using multiple availability zones), each subnet shares the same network ACL and is configured with a flow log that shares the same CloudWatch log group.
  2. Scheduled flow log analysis. Amazon EventBridge starts an AWS Step Functions state machine on a time interval (60 seconds by default). The state machine starts a Lambda function immediately, and then again after 30 seconds. The Lambda function performs steps 3–6.
  3. Summarize recent network traffic. The Lambda function runs a CloudWatch Logs Insights query. The query scans the most recent flow logs (5-minute window) to summarize packet frequency grouped by source IP. These groupings are called packet bins, where each bin represents the number of packets sent by a source IP within a given minute of time.
  4. Update time series database. A time series database in Timestream is updated with the most recent packet bins.
  5. Use statistical analysis to detect abusive source IPs. A Timestream query is used to perform several calculations. The query calculates the average bin size over the past hour, along with the standard deviation. These two values are then used to calculate the maximum Z-score for all source IPs over the past hour. This means an abusive IP will remain flagged for one hour even if it stopped sending traffic. Z-scores are sorted so that the most abusive source IPs are prioritized. If a source IP meets these two criteria, it is considered abusive.
    1. Maximum Z-score exceeds a threshold (defaults to 3.0).
    2. Packet bin exceeds a threshold (defaults to 12,000). This avoids flagging source IPs during periods of overall low traffic when there is no need to block traffic.
  6. Publish anomalous source IPs. Publish a message to an Amazon SNS topic with a list of anomalous source IPs. The function also publishes CloudWatch metrics to help you track the number of unique and abusive source IPs over time. At this point, the flow log summarizer function has finished its job until the next time it’s invoked from EventBridge.
  7. Receive anomalous source IPs. The network ACL updater function is subscribed to the SNS topic. It receives the list of anomalous source IPs.
  8. Update the network ACL. The network ACL updater function uses two network ACLs called blue and green. This verifies that the active rules remain in place while updating the rules in the inactive network ACL. When the inactive network ACL rules are updated, the function swaps network ACLs on each subnet. By default, each network ACL has a limit of 20 rules. If the number of anomalous source IPs exceeds the network ACL limit, the source IPs with the highest Z-score are prioritized. CloudWatch metrics are provided to help you track the number of source IPs blocked, and how many source IPs couldn’t be blocked due to network ACL limits.

Prerequisites

This solution assumes you have one or more public subnets used to operate an internet-facing endpoint.

Deploy the solution

Follow these steps to deploy and validate the solution.

  1. Download the latest release from GitHub.
  2. Upload the AWS CloudFormation templates and Python code to an S3 bucket.
  3. Gather the information needed for the CloudFormation template parameters.
  4. Create the CloudFormation stack.
  5. Monitor traffic mitigation activity using the CloudWatch dashboard.

Let’s review the steps I followed in my environment.

Step 1. Download the latest release

I create a new directory on my computer named auto-nacl-deploy. I review the releases on GitHub and choose the latest version. I download auto-nacl.zip into the auto-nacl-deploy directory. Now it’s time to stage this code in Amazon Simple Storage Service (Amazon S3).

Figure 2: Save auto-nacl.zip to the auto-nacl-deploy directory

Figure 2: Save auto-nacl.zip to the auto-nacl-deploy directory

Step 2. Upload the CloudFormation templates and Python code to an S3 bucket

I extract the auto-nacl.zip file into my auto-nacl-deploy directory.

Figure 3: Expand auto-nacl.zip into the auto-nacl-deploy directory

Figure 3: Expand auto-nacl.zip into the auto-nacl-deploy directory

The template.yaml file is used to create a CloudFormation stack with four nested stacks. You copy all files to an S3 bucket prior to creating the stacks.

To stage these files in Amazon S3, use an existing bucket or create a new one. For this example, I used an existing S3 bucket named auto-nacl-us-east-1. Using the Amazon S3 console, I created a folder named artifacts and then uploaded the extracted files to it. My bucket now looks like Figure 4.

Figure 4: Upload the extracted files to Amazon S3

Figure 4: Upload the extracted files to Amazon S3

Step 3. Gather information needed for the CloudFormation template parameters

There are six parameters required by the CloudFormation template.

Template parameter Parameter description
VpcId The ID of the VPC that runs your application.
SubnetIds A comma-delimited list of public subnet IDs used by your endpoint.
ListenerPort The IP port number for your endpoint’s listener.
ListenerProtocol The Internet Protocol (TCP or UDP) used by your endpoint.
SourceCodeS3Bucket The S3 bucket that contains the files you uploaded in Step 2. This bucket must be in the same AWS Region as the CloudFormation stack.
SourceCodeS3Prefix The S3 prefix (folder) of the files you uploaded in Step 2.

For the VpcId parameter, I use the VPC console to find the VPC ID for my application.

Figure 5: Find the VPC ID

Figure 5: Find the VPC ID

For the SubnetIds parameter, I use the VPC console to find the subnet IDs for my application. My VPC has public and private subnets. For this solution, you only need the public subnets.

Figure 6: Find the subnet IDs

Figure 6: Find the subnet IDs

My application uses a Network Load Balancer that listens on port 80 to handle TCP traffic. I use 80 for ListenerPort and TCP for ListenerProtocol.

The next two parameters are based on the Amazon S3 location I used earlier. I use auto-nacl-us-east-1 for SourceCodeS3Bucket and artifacts for SourceCodeS3Prefix.

Step 4. Create the CloudFormation stack

I use the CloudFormation console to create a stack. The Amazon S3 URL format is https://<bucket>.s3.<region>.amazonaws.com/<prefix>/template.yaml. I enter the Amazon S3 URL for my environment, then choose Next.

Figure 7: Specify the CloudFormation template

Figure 7: Specify the CloudFormation template

I enter a name for my stack (for example, auto-nacl-1) along with the parameter values I gathered in Step 3. I leave all optional parameters as they are, then choose Next.

Figure 8: Provide the required parameters

Figure 8: Provide the required parameters

I review the stack options, then scroll to the bottom and choose Next.

Figure 9: Review the default stack options

Figure 9: Review the default stack options

I scroll down to the Capabilities section and acknowledge the capabilities required by CloudFormation, then choose Submit.

Figure 10: Acknowledge the capabilities required by CloudFormation

Figure 10: Acknowledge the capabilities required by CloudFormation

I wait for the stack to reach CREATE_COMPLETE status. It takes 10–15 minutes to create all of the nested stacks.

Figure 11: Wait for the stacks to complete

Figure 11: Wait for the stacks to complete

Step 5. Monitor traffic mitigation activity using the CloudWatch dashboard

After the CloudFormation stacks are complete, I navigate to the CloudWatch console to open the dashboard. In my environment, the dashboard is named auto-nacl-1-MitigationDashboard-YS697LIEHKGJ.

Figure 12: Find the CloudWatch dashboard

Figure 12: Find the CloudWatch dashboard

Initially, the dashboard, shown in Figure 13, has little information to display. After an hour, I can see the following metrics from my sample environment:

  • The Network Traffic graph shows how many packets are allowed and rejected by network ACL rules. No anomalies have been detected yet, so this only shows allowed traffic.
  • The All Source IPs graph shows how many total unique source IP addresses are sending traffic.
  • The Anomalous Source Networks graph shows how many anomalous source networks are being blocked by network ACL rules (or not blocked due to network ACL rule limit). This graph is blank unless anomalies have been detected in the last hour.
  • The Anomalous Source IPs graph shows how many anomalous source IP addresses are being blocked (or not blocked) by network ACL rules. This graph is blank unless anomalies have been detected in the last hour.
  • The Packet Statistics graph can help you determine if the sensitivity should be adjusted. This graph shows the average packets-per-minute and the associated standard deviation over the past hour. It also shows the anomaly threshold, which represents the minimum number of packets-per-minute for a source IP address to be considered an anomaly. The anomaly threshold is calculated based on the CloudFormation parameter MinZScore.

    anomaly threshold = (MinZScore * standard deviation) + average

    Increasing the MinZScore parameter raises the threshold and reduces sensitivity. You can also adjust the CloudFormation parameter MinPacketsPerBin to mitigate against blocking traffic during periods of low volume, even if a source IP address exceeds the minimum Z-score.

  • The Blocked IPs grid shows which source IP addresses are being blocked during each hour, along with the corresponding packet bin size and Z-score. This grid is blank unless anomalies have been detected in the last hour.
     
Figure 13: Observe the dashboard after one hour

Figure 13: Observe the dashboard after one hour

Let’s review a scenario to see what happens when my endpoint sees two waves of anomalous traffic.

By default, my network ACL allows a maximum of 20 inbound rules. The two default rules count toward this limit, so I only have room for 18 more inbound rules. My application sees a spike of network traffic from 20 unique source IP addresses. When the traffic spike begins, the anomaly is detected in less than five minutes. Network ACL rules are created to block the top 18 source IP addresses (sorted by Z-score). Traffic is blocked for about 5 minutes until the flood subsides. The rules remain in place for 1 hour by default. When the same 20 source IP addresses send another traffic flood a few minutes later, most traffic is immediately blocked. Some traffic is still allowed from two source IP addresses that can’t be blocked due to the limit of 18 rules.

Figure 14: Observe traffic blocked from anomalous source IP addresses

Figure 14: Observe traffic blocked from anomalous source IP addresses

Customize the solution

You can customize the behavior of this solution to fit your use case.

  • Block many IP addresses per network ACL rule. To enable blocking more source IP addresses than your network ACL rule limit, change the CloudFormation parameter NaclRuleNetworkMask (default is 32). This sets the network mask used in network ACL rules and lets you block IP address ranges instead of individual IP addresses. By default, the IP address 192.0.2.1 is blocked by a network ACL rule for 192.0.2.1/32. Setting this parameter to 24 results in a network ACL rule that blocks 192.0.2.0/24. As a reminder, address ranges that are too wide might result in blocking legitimate traffic.
  • Only block source IPs that exceed a packet volume threshold. Use the CloudFormation parameter MinPacketsPerBin (default is 12,000) to set the minimum packets per minute. This mitigates against blocking source IPs (even if their Z-score is high) during periods of overall low traffic when there is no need to block traffic.
  • Adjust the sensitivity of anomaly detection. Use the CloudFormation parameter MinZScore to set the minimum Z-score for a source IP to be considered an anomaly. The default is 3.0, which only blocks source IPs with packet volume that exceeds 99.7 percent of all other source IPs.
  • Exclude trusted source IPs from anomaly detection. Specify an allow list object in Amazon S3 that contains a list of IP addresses or CIDRs that you want to exclude from network ACL rules. The network ACL updater function reads the allow list every time it handles an SNS message.

Limitations

As covered in the preceding sections, this solution has a few limitations to be aware of:

  • CloudWatch Logs queries can only return up to 10,000 records. This means the traffic baseline can only be calculated based on the observation of 10,000 unique source IP addresses per minute.
  • The traffic baseline is based on a rolling 1-hour window. You might need to increase this if a 1-hour window results in a baseline that allows false positives. For example, you might need a longer baseline window if your service normally handles abrupt spikes that occur hourly or daily.
  • By default, a network ACL can only hold 20 inbound rules. This includes the default allow and deny rules, so there’s room for 18 deny rules. You can increase this limit from 20 to 40 with a support case; however, it means that a maximum of 18 (or 38) source IP addresses can be blocked at one time.
  • The speed of anomaly detection is dependent on how quickly VPC flow logs are delivered to CloudWatch. This usually takes 2–4 minutes but can take over 6 minutes.

Cost considerations

CloudWatch Logs Insights queries are the main element of cost for this solution. See CloudWatch pricing for more information. The cost is about 7.70 USD per GB of flow logs generated per month.

To optimize the cost of CloudWatch queries, the VPC flow log record format only includes the fields required for anomaly detection. The CloudWatch log group is configured with a retention of 1 day. You can tune your cost by adjusting the anomaly detector function to run less frequently (the default is twice per minute). The tradeoff is that the network ACL rules won’t be updated as frequently. This can lead to the solution taking longer to mitigate a traffic flood.

Conclusion

Maintaining high availability and responsiveness is important to keeping the trust of your customers. The solution described above can help you automatically mitigate a variety of network floods that can impact the availability of your application even if you’ve followed all the applicable best practices for DDoS resiliency. There are limitations to this solution, but it can quickly detect and mitigate disruptive sources of traffic in a cost-effective manner. Your feedback is important. You can share comments below and report issues on GitHub.

 
If you have feedback about this post, submit comments in the Comments section below.

Want more AWS Security news? Follow us on Twitter.

Bryan Van Hook

Bryan Van Hook

Bryan is a Senior Security Solutions Architect at AWS. He has over 25 years of experience in software engineering, cloud operations, and internet security. He spends most of his time helping customers gain the most value from native AWS security services. Outside of his day job, Bryan can be found playing tabletop games and acoustic guitar.

AWS achieves ISO/IEC 20000-1:2018 certification for AWS Asia Pacific (Mumbai) and (Hyderabad) Regions

Post Syndicated from Airish Mariano original https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/security/aws-achieves-iso-iec-20000-12018-certification-for-aws-asia-pacific-mumbai-and-hyderabad-regions/

Amazon Web Services (AWS) is proud to announce the successful completion of the ISO/IEC 20000-1:2018 certification for the AWS Asia Pacific (Mumbai) and (Hyderabad) Regions in India.

The scope of the ISO/IEC 20000-1:2018 certification is limited to the IT Service Management System (ITSMS) of AWS India Data Center (DC) Operations that supports the delivery of Security Operations Center (SOC) and Network Operation Center (NOC) managed services.

ISO/IEC 20000-1 is a service management system (SMS) standard that specifies requirements for establishing, implementing, maintaining, and continually improving an SMS. An SMS supports the management of the service lifecycle, including the planning, design, transition, delivery, and improvement of services, which meet agreed upon requirements and deliver value for customers, users, and the organization that delivers the services.

The ISO/IEC 20000-1 certification provides an assurance that the AWS Data Center operations in India support the delivery of SOC and NOC managed services, in accordance with the ISO/IEC 20000-1 guidance and in line with the requirements of the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY), government of India.

An independent third-party auditor assessed AWS. Customers can download the latest ISO/IEC 20000-1:2018 certificate on AWS Artifact, a self-service portal for on-demand access to AWS compliance reports. Sign in to AWS Artifact in the AWS Management Console, or learn more at Getting Started with AWS Artifact.

AWS is committed to bringing new services into the scope of its compliance programs to help you meet your architectural, business, and regulatory needs. If you have questions about the ISO/IEC 20000-1:2018 certification, contact your AWS account team.

If you have feedback about this post, submit comments in the Comments section below.

Want more AWS Security how-to content, news, and feature announcements? Follow us on Twitter.

Airish Mariano

Airish Mariano

Airish is an Audit Specialist at AWS based in Singapore. She leads security audit engagements in the Asia-Pacific region. Airish also drives the execution and delivery of compliance programs that provide security assurance for customers to accelerate their cloud adoption.

Build streaming data pipelines with Amazon MSK Serverless and IAM authentication

Post Syndicated from Marvin Gersho original https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/big-data/build-streaming-data-pipelines-with-amazon-msk-serverless-and-iam-authentication/

Currently, MSK Serverless only directly supports IAM for authentication using Java. This example shows how to use this mechanism. Additionally, it provides a pattern creating a proxy that can easily be integrated into solutions built in languages other than Java.

The rising trend in today’s tech landscape is the use of streaming data and event-oriented structures. They are being applied in numerous ways, including monitoring website traffic, tracking industrial Internet of Things (IoT) devices, analyzing video game player behavior, and managing data for cutting-edge analytics systems.

Apache Kafka, a top-tier open-source tool, is making waves in this domain. It’s widely adopted by numerous users for building fast and efficient data pipelines, analyzing streaming data, merging data from different sources, and supporting essential applications.

Amazon’s serverless Apache Kafka offering, Amazon Managed Streaming for Apache Kafka (Amazon MSK) Serverless, is attracting a lot of interest. It’s appreciated for its user-friendly approach, ability to scale automatically, and cost-saving benefits over other Kafka solutions. However, a hurdle encountered by many users is the requirement of MSK Serverless to use AWS Identity and Access Management (IAM) access control. At the time of writing, the Amazon MSK library for IAM is exclusive to Kafka libraries in Java, creating a challenge for users of other programming languages. In this post, we aim to address this issue and present how you can use Amazon API Gateway and AWS Lambda to navigate around this obstacle.

SASL/SCRAM authentication vs. IAM authentication

Compared to the traditional authentication methods like Salted Challenge Response Authentication Mechanism (SCRAM), the IAM extension into Apache Kafka through MSK Serverless provides a lot of benefits. Before we delve into those, it’s important to understand what SASL/SCRAM authentication is. Essentially, it’s a traditional method used to confirm a user’s identity before giving them access to a system. This process requires users or clients to provide a user name and password, which the system then cross-checks against stored credentials (for example, via AWS Secrets Manager) to decide whether or not access should be granted.

Compared to this approach, IAM simplifies permission management across AWS environments, enables the creation and strict enforcement of detailed permissions and policies, and uses temporary credentials rather than the typical user name and password authentication. Another benefit of using IAM is that you can use IAM for both authentication and authorization. If you use SASL/SCRAM, you have to additionally manage ACLs via a separate mechanism. In IAM, you can use the IAM policy attached to the IAM principal to define the fine-grained access control for that IAM principal. All of these improvements make the IAM integration a more efficient and secure solution for most use cases.

However, for applications not built in Java, utilizing MSK Serverless becomes tricky. The standard SASL/SCRAM authentication isn’t available, and non-Java Kafka libraries don’t have a way to use IAM access control. This calls for an alternative approach to connect to MSK Serverless clusters.

But there’s an alternative pattern. Without having to rewrite your existing application in Java, you can employ API Gateway and Lambda as a proxy in front of a cluster. They can handle API requests and relay them to Kafka topics instantly. API Gateway takes in producer requests and channels them to a Lambda function, written in Java using the Amazon MSK IAM library. It then communicates with the MSK Serverless Kafka topic using IAM access control. After the cluster receives the message, it can be further processed within the MSK Serverless setup.

You can also utilize Lambda on the consumer side of MSK Serverless topics, bypassing the Java requirement on the consumer side. You can do this by setting Amazon MSK as an event source for a Lambda function. When the Lambda function is triggered, the data sent to the function includes an array of records from the Kafka topic—no need for direct contact with Amazon MSK.

Solution overview

This example walks you through how to build a serverless real-time stream producer application using API Gateway and Lambda.

For testing, this post includes a sample AWS Cloud Development Kit (AWS CDK) application. This creates a demo environment, including an MSK Serverless cluster, three Lambda functions, and an API Gateway that consumes the messages from the Kafka topic.

The following diagram shows the architecture of the resulting application including its data flows.

The data flow contains the following steps:

  1. The infrastructure is defined in an AWS CDK application. By running this application, a set of AWS CloudFormation templates is created.
  2. AWS CloudFormation creates all infrastructure components, including a Lambda function that runs during the deployment process to create a topic in the MSK Serverless cluster and to retrieve the authentication endpoint needed for the producer Lambda function. On destruction of the CloudFormation stack, the same Lambda function gets triggered again to delete the topic from the cluster.
  3. An external application calls an API Gateway endpoint.
  4. API Gateway forwards the request to a Lambda function.
  5. The Lambda function acts as a Kafka producer and pushes the message to a Kafka topic using IAM authentication.
  6. The Lambda event source mapping mechanism triggers the Lambda consumer function and forwards the message to it.
  7. The Lambda consumer function logs the data to Amazon CloudWatch.

Note that we don’t need to worry about Availability Zones. MSK Serverless automatically replicates the data across multiple Availability Zones to ensure high availability of the data.

The demo additionally shows how to use Lambda Powertools for Java to streamline logging and tracing and the IAM authenticator for the simple authentication process outlined in the introduction.

The following sections take you through the steps to deploy, test, and observe the example application.

Prerequisites

The example has the following prerequisites:

  • An AWS account. If you haven’t signed up, complete the following steps:
  • The following software installed on your development machine, or use an AWS Cloud9 environment, which comes with all requirements preinstalled:
  • Appropriate AWS credentials for interacting with resources in your AWS account.

Deploy the solution

Complete the following steps to deploy the solution:

  1. Clone the project GitHub repository and change the directory to subfolder serverless-kafka-iac:
git clone https://github.com/aws-samples/apigateway-lambda-msk-serverless-integration
cd apigateway-lambda-msk-serverless-integration/serverless-kafka-iac
  1. Configure environment variables:
export CDK_DEFAULT_ACCOUNT=$(aws sts get-caller-identity --query 'Account' --output text)
export CDK_DEFAULT_REGION=$(aws configure get region)
  1. Prepare the virtual Python environment:
python3 -m venv .venv

source .venv/bin/activate

pip3 install -r requirements.txt
  1. Bootstrap your account for AWS CDK usage:
cdk bootstrap aws://$CDK_DEFAULT_ACCOUNT/$CDK_DEFAULT_REGION
  1. Run cdk synth to build the code and test the requirements (ensure docker daemon is running on your machine):
cdk synth
  1. Run cdk deploy to deploy the code to your AWS account:
cdk deploy --all

Test the solution

To test the solution, we generate messages for the Kafka topics by sending calls through the API Gateway from our development machine or AWS Cloud9 environment. We then go to the CloudWatch console to observe incoming messages in the log files of the Lambda consumer function.

  1. Open a terminal on your development machine to test the API with the Python script provided under /serverless_kafka_iac/test_api.py:
python3 test-api.py

  1. On the Lambda console, open the Lambda function named ServerlessKafkaConsumer.

  1. On the Monitor tab, choose View CloudWatch logs to access the logs of the Lambda function.

  1. Choose the latest log stream to access the log files of the last run.

You can review the log entry of the received Kafka messages in the log of the Lambda function.

Trace a request

All components integrate with AWS X-Ray. With AWS X-Ray, you can trace the entire application, which is useful to identify bottlenecks when load testing. You can also trace method runs at the Java method level.

Lambda Powertools for Java allows you to shortcut this process by adding the @Trace annotation to a method to see traces on the method level in X-Ray.

To trace a request end to end, complete the following steps:

  1. On the CloudWatch console, choose Service map in the navigation pane.
  2. Select a component to investigate (for example, the Lambda function where you deployed the Kafka producer).
  3. Choose View traces.

  1. Choose a single Lambda method invocation and investigate further at the Java method level.

Implement a Kafka producer in Lambda

Kafka natively supports Java. To stay open, cloud native, and without third-party dependencies, the producer is written in that language. Currently, the IAM authenticator is only available to Java. In this example, the Lambda handler receives a message from an API Gateway source and pushes this message to an MSK topic called messages.

Typically, Kafka producers are long-living and pushing a message to a Kafka topic is an asynchronous process. Because Lambda is ephemeral, you must enforce a full flush of a submitted message until the Lambda function ends by calling producer.flush():

// Copyright Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates. All Rights Reserved.
// SPDX-License-Identifier: MIT-0
package software.amazon.samples.kafka.lambda;
 
// This class is part of the AWS samples package and specifically deals with Kafka integration in a Lambda function.
// It serves as a simple API Gateway to Kafka Proxy, accepting requests and forwarding them to a Kafka topic.
public class SimpleApiGatewayKafkaProxy implements RequestHandler<APIGatewayProxyRequestEvent, APIGatewayProxyResponseEvent> {
 
    // Specifies the name of the Kafka topic where the messages will be sent
    public static final String TOPIC_NAME = "messages";
 
    // Logger instance for logging events of this class
    private static final Logger log = LogManager.getLogger(SimpleApiGatewayKafkaProxy.class);
    
    // Factory to create properties for Kafka Producer
    public KafkaProducerPropertiesFactory kafkaProducerProperties = new KafkaProducerPropertiesFactoryImpl();
    
    // Instance of KafkaProducer
    private KafkaProducer<String, String>[KT1]  producer;
 
    // Overridden method from the RequestHandler interface to handle incoming API Gateway proxy events
    @Override
    @Tracing
    @Logging(logEvent = true)
    public APIGatewayProxyResponseEvent handleRequest(APIGatewayProxyRequestEvent input, Context context) {
        
        // Creating a response object to send back 
        APIGatewayProxyResponseEvent response = createEmptyResponse();
        try {
            // Extracting the message from the request body
            String message = getMessageBody(input);
 
            // Create a Kafka producer
            KafkaProducer<String, String> producer = createProducer();
 
            // Creating a record with topic name, request ID as key and message as value 
            ProducerRecord<String, String> record = new ProducerRecord<String, String>(TOPIC_NAME, context.getAwsRequestId(), message);
 
            // Sending the record to Kafka topic and getting the metadata of the record
            Future<RecordMetadata>[KT2]  send = producer.send(record);
            producer.flush();
 
            // Retrieve metadata about the sent record
            RecordMetadata metadata = send.get();
 
            // Logging the partition where the message was sent
            log.info(String.format("Message was send to partition %s", metadata.partition()));
 
            // If the message was successfully sent, return a 200 status code
            return response.withStatusCode(200).withBody("Message successfully pushed to kafka");
        } catch (Exception e) {
            // In case of exception, log the error message and return a 500 status code
            log.error(e.getMessage(), e);
            return response.withBody(e.getMessage()).withStatusCode(500);
        }
    }
 
    // Creates a Kafka producer if it doesn't already exist
    @Tracing
    private KafkaProducer<String, String> createProducer() {
        if (producer == null) {
            log.info("Connecting to kafka cluster");
            producer = new KafkaProducer<String, String>(kafkaProducerProperties.getProducerProperties());
        }
        return producer;
    }
 
    // Extracts the message from the request body. If it's base64 encoded, it's decoded first.
    private String getMessageBody(APIGatewayProxyRequestEvent input) {
        String body = input.getBody();
 
        if (input.getIsBase64Encoded()) {
            body = decode(body);
        }
        return body;
    }
 
    // Creates an empty API Gateway proxy response event with predefined headers.
    private APIGatewayProxyResponseEvent createEmptyResponse() {
        Map<String, String> headers = new HashMap<>();
        headers.put("Content-Type", "application/json");
        headers.put("X-Custom-Header", "application/json");
        APIGatewayProxyResponseEvent response = new APIGatewayProxyResponseEvent().withHeaders(headers);
        return response;
    }
}

Connect to Amazon MSK using IAM authentication

This post uses IAM authentication to connect to the respective Kafka cluster. For information about how to configure the producer for connectivity, refer to IAM access control.

Because you configure the cluster via IAM, grant Connect and WriteData permissions to the producer so that it can push messages to Kafka:

{
    “Version”: “2012-10-17”,
    “Statement”: [
        {            
            “Effect”: “Allow”,
            “Action”: [
                “kafka-cluster:Connect”
            ],
            “Resource”: “arn:aws:kafka:region:account-id:cluster/cluster-name/cluster-uuid “
        }
    ]
}
 
 
{
    “Version”: “2012-10-17”,
    “Statement”: [
        {            
            “Effect”: “Allow”,
            “Action”: [
                “kafka-cluster:Connect”,
                “kafka-cluster: DescribeTopic”,
            ],
            “Resource”: “arn:aws:kafka:region:account-id:topic/cluster-name/cluster-uuid/topic-name“
        }
    ]
}

This shows the Kafka excerpt of the IAM policy, which must be applied to the Kafka producer. When using IAM authentication, be aware of the current limits of IAM Kafka authentication, which affect the number of concurrent connections and IAM requests for a producer. Refer to Amazon MSK quota and follow the recommendation for authentication backoff in the producer client:

        Map<String, String> configuration = Map.of(
                “key.serializer”, “org.apache.kafka.common.serialization.StringSerializer”,
                “value.serializer”, “org.apache.kafka.common.serialization.StringSerializer”,
                “bootstrap.servers”, getBootstrapServer(),
                “security.protocol”, “SASL_SSL”,
                “sasl.mechanism”, “AWS_MSK_IAM”,
                “sasl.jaas.config”, “software.amazon.msk.auth.iam.IAMLoginModule required;”,
                “sasl.client.callback.handler.class”,
				“software.amazon.msk.auth.iam.IAMClientCallbackHandler”,
                “connections.max.idle.ms”, “60”,
                “reconnect.backoff.ms”, “1000”
        );

Additional considerations

Each MSK Serverless cluster can handle 100 requests per second. To reduce IAM authentication requests from the Kafka producer, place it outside of the handler. For frequent calls, there is a chance that Lambda reuses the previously created class instance and only reruns the handler.

For bursting workloads with a high number of concurrent API Gateway requests, this can lead to dropped messages. Although this might be tolerable for some workloads, for others this might not be the case.

In these cases, you can extend the architecture with a buffering technology like Amazon Simple Queue Service (Amazon SQS) or Amazon Kinesis Data Streams between API Gateway and Lambda.

To reduce latency, reduce cold start times for Java by changing the tiered compilation level to 1, as described in Optimizing AWS Lambda function performance for Java. Provisioned concurrency ensures that polling Lambda functions don’t need to warm up before requests arrive.

Conclusion

In this post, we showed how to create a serverless integration Lambda function between API Gateway and MSK Serverless as a way to do IAM authentication when your producer is not written in Java. You also learned about the native integration of Lambda and Amazon MSK on the consumer side. Additionally, we showed how to deploy such an integration with the AWS CDK.

The general pattern is suitable for many use cases where you want to use IAM authentication but your producers or consumers are not written in Java, but you still want to take advantage of the benefits of MSK Serverless, like its ability to scale up and down with unpredictable or spikey workloads or its little to no operational overhead of running Apache Kafka.

You can also use MSK Serverless to reduce operational complexity by automating provisioning and the management of capacity needs, including the need to constantly monitor brokers and storage.

For more serverless learning resources, visit Serverless Land.

For more information on MSK Serverless, check out the following:


About the Authors

Philipp Klose is a Global Solutions Architect at AWS based in Munich. He works with enterprise FSI customers and helps them solve business problems by architecting serverless platforms. In this free time, Philipp spends time with his family and enjoys every geek hobby possible.

Daniel Wessendorf is a Global Solutions Architect at AWS based in Munich. He works with enterprise FSI customers and is primarily specialized in machine learning and data architectures. In his free time, he enjoys swimming, hiking, skiing, and spending quality time with his family.

Marvin Gersho is a Senior Solutions Architect at AWS based in New York City. He works with a wide range of startup customers. He previously worked for many years in engineering leadership and hands-on application development, and now focuses on helping customers architect secure and scalable workloads on AWS with a minimum of operational overhead. In his free time, Marvin enjoys cycling and strategy board games.

Nathan Lichtenstein is a Senior Solutions Architect at AWS based in New York City. Primarily working with startups, he ensures his customers build smart on AWS, delivering creative solutions to their complex technical challenges. Nathan has worked in cloud and network architecture in the media, financial services, and retail spaces. Outside of work, he can often be found at a Broadway theater.

How to enforce DNS name constraints in AWS Private CA

Post Syndicated from Isaiah Schisler original https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/security/how-to-enforce-dns-name-constraints-in-aws-private-ca/

In March 2022, AWS announced support for custom certificate extensions, including name constraints, using AWS Certificate Manager (ACM) Private Certificate Authority (CA). Defining DNS name constraints with your subordinate CA can help establish guardrails to improve public key infrastructure (PKI) security and mitigate certificate misuse. For example, you can set a DNS name constraint that restricts the CA from issuing certificates to a resource that is using a specific domain name. Certificate requests from resources using an unauthorized domain name will be rejected by your CA and won’t be issued a certificate.

In this blog post, I’ll walk you step-by-step through the process of applying DNS name constraints to a subordinate CA by using the AWS Private CA service.

Prerequisites

You need to have the following prerequisite tools, services, and permissions in place before following the steps presented within this post:

  1. AWS Identity and Access Management (IAM) permissions with full access to AWS Certificate Manager and AWS Private CA. The corresponding AWS managed policies are named AWSCertificateManagerFullAccess and AWSCertificateManagerPrivateCAFullAccess.
  2. AWS Command Line Interface (AWS CLI) 2.9.13 or later installed.
  3. Python 3.7.15 or later installed.
  4. Python’s package manager, pip, 20.2.2 or later installed.
  5. An existing deployment of AWS Private CA with a root and subordinate CA.
  6. The Amazon Resource Names (ARN) for your root and subordinate CAs.
  7. The command-line JSON processor jq.
  8. The Git command-line tool.
  9. All of the examples in this blog post are provided for the us-west-2 AWS Region. You will need to make sure that you have access to resources in your desired Region and specify the Region in the example commands.

Retrieve the solution code

Our GitHub repository contains the Python code that you need in order to replicate the steps presented in this post. There are two methods for cloning the repository provided, HTTPS or SSH. Select the method that you prefer.

To clone the solution repository using HTTPS

  • Run the following command in your terminal.
    git clone https://github.com/aws-samples/aws-private-ca-enforce-dns-name-constraints.git

To clone the solution repository using SSH

  • Run the following command in your terminal.
    git clone [email protected]:aws-samples/aws-private-ca-enforce-dns-name-constraints.git

Set up your Python environment

Creating a Python virtual environment will allow you to run this solution in a fresh environment without impacting your existing Python packages. This will prevent the solution from interfering with dependencies that your other Python scripts may have. The virtual environment has its own set of Python packages installed. Read the official Python documentation on virtual environments for more information on their purpose and functionality.

To create a Python virtual environment

  1. Create a new directory for the Python virtual environment in your home path.
    mkdir ~/python-venv-for-aws-private-ca-name-constraints

  2. Create a Python virtual environment using the directory that you just created.
    python -m venv ~/python-venv-for-aws-private-ca-name-constraints

  3. Activate the Python virtual environment.
    source ~/python-venv-for-aws-private-ca-name-constraints/bin/activate

  4. Upgrade pip to the latest version.
    python -m pip install --upgrade pip

To install the required Python packages

  1. Navigate to the solution source directory. Make sure to replace <~/github> with your information.
    cd <~/github>/aws-private-ca-name-constraints/src/

  2. Install the necessary Python packages and dependencies. Make sure to replace <~/github> with your information.
    pip install -r <~/github>/aws-private-ca-name-constraints/src/requirements.txt

Generate the API passthrough file with encoded name constraints

This step allows you to define the permitted and excluded DNS name constraints to apply to your subordinate CA. Read the documentation on name constraints in RFC 5280 for more information on their usage and functionality.

The Python encoder provided in this solution accepts two arguments for the permitted and excluded name constraints. The -p argument is used to provide the permitted subtrees, and the -e argument is used to provide the excluded subtrees. Use commas without spaces to separate multiple entries. For example: -p .dev.example.com,.test.example.com -e .prod.dev.example.com,.amazon.com.

To encode your name constraints

  1. Run the following command, and update <~/github> with your information and provide your desired name constraints for the permitted (-p) and excluded (-e) arguments.
    python <~/github>/aws-private-ca-name-constraints/src/name-constraints-encoder.py -p <.dev.example.com,.test.example.com> -e <.prod.dev.example.com>

  2. If the command runs successfully, you will see the message “Successfully Encoded Name Constraints” and the name of the generated API passthrough JSON file. The output of Permitted Subtrees will show the domain names you passed with the -p argument, and Excluded Subtrees will show the domain names you passed with the -e argument in the previous step.
    Figure 1: Command line output example for name-constraints-encoder.py

    Figure 1: Command line output example for name-constraints-encoder.py

  3. Use the following command to display the contents of the API passthrough file generated by the Python encoder.
    cat <~/github>/aws-private-ca-name-constraints/src/api_passthrough_config.json | jq .

  4. The contents of api_passthrough_config.json will look similar to the following screenshot. The JSON object will have an ObjectIdentifier key and value of 2.5.29.30, which represents the name constraints OID from the Global OID database. The base64-encoded Value represents the permitted and excluded name constraints you provided to the Python encoder earlier.
    Figure 2: Viewing contents of api_passthrough_config.json

    Figure 2: Viewing contents of api_passthrough_config.json

Generate a CSR from your subordinate CA

You must generate a certificate signing request (CSR) from the subordinate CA to which you intend to have the name constraints applied. Otherwise, you might encounter errors when you attempt to install the new certificate with name constraints.

To generate the CSR

  1. Update and run the following command with your subordinate CA ARN and Region. The ARN is something that uniquely identifies AWS resources, similar to how your home address tells the mail person where to deliver the mail. In this case, the ARN is the unique identifier for your subordinate CA that tells the command which subordinate CA it’s interacting with.
    aws acm-pca get-certificate-authority-csr \
    --certificate-authority-arn <arn:aws:acm-pca:us-west-2:111111111111:certificate-authority/cdd22222-2222-2f22-bb2e-222f222222ab> \
    --output text \
    --region <us-west-2> > ca.csr 

  2. View your subordinate CA’s CSR.
    openssl req -text -noout -verify -in ca.csr

  3. The following screenshot provides an example output for a CSR. Your CSR details will be different; however, you should see something similar. Look for verify OK in the output and make sure that the Subject details match your subordinate CA. The subject details will provide the country, state, and city. The details will also likely contain your organization’s name, organizational unit or department name, and a common name for the subordinate CA.
    Figure 3: Reviewing CSR content using openssl

    Figure 3: Reviewing CSR content using openssl

Use the root CA to issue a new certificate with the name constraints custom extension

This post uses a two-tiered certificate authority architecture for simplicity. However, you can use the steps in this post with a more complex multi-level CA architecture. The name constraints certificate will be generated by the root CA and applied to the intermediary CA.

To issue and download a certificate with name constraints

  1. Run the following command, making sure to update the argument values in red italics with your information. Make sure that the certificate-authority-arn is that of your root CA.
    • Note that the provided template-arn instructs the root CA to use the api_passthrough_config.json file that you created earlier to generate the certificate with the name constraints custom extension. If you use a different template, the new certificate might not be created as you intended.
    • Also, note that the validity period provided in this example is 5 years or 1825 days. The validity period for your subordinate CA must be less than that of your root CA.
    aws acm-pca issue-certificate \
    --certificate-authority-arn <arn:aws:acm-pca:us-west-2:111111111111:certificate-authority/111f1111-ba1b-1111-b11d-11ce1a11afae> \
    --csr fileb://ca.csr \
    --signing-algorithm <SHA256WITHRSA> \
    --template-arn arn:aws:acm-pca:::template/SubordinateCACertificate_PathLen0_APIPassthrough/V1 \
    --api-passthrough file://api_passthrough_config.json \
    --validity Value=<1825>,Type=<DAYS> \
    --region <us-west-2>

  2. If the issue-certificate command is successful, the output will provide the ARN of the new certificate that is issued by the root CA. Copy the certificate ARN, because it will be used in the following command.
    Figure 4: Issuing a certificate with name constraints from the root CA using the AWS CLI

    Figure 4: Issuing a certificate with name constraints from the root CA using the AWS CLI

  3. To download the new certificate, run the following command. Make sure to update the placeholders in red italics with your root CA’s certificate-authority-arn, the certificate-arn you obtained from the previous step, and your region.
    aws acm-pca get-certificate \
    --certificate-authority-arn <arn:aws:acm-pca:us-west-2:111111111111:certificate-authority/111f1111-ba1b-1111-b11d-11ce1a11afae> \
    --certificate-arn <arn:aws:acm-pca:us-west-2:11111111111:certificate-authority/111f1111-ba1b-1111-b11d-11ce1a11afae/certificate/c555ced55c5a55aaa5f555e5555fd5f5> \
    --region <us-west-2> \
    --output json > cert.json

  4. Separate the certificate and certificate chain into two separate files by running the following commands. The new subordinate CA certificate is saved as cert.pem and the certificate chain is saved as cert_chain.pem.
    cat cert.json | jq -r .Certificate > cert.pem 
    cat cert.json | jq -r .CertificateChain > cert_chain.pem

  5. Verify that the certificate and certificate chain are valid and configured as expected.
    openssl x509 -in cert.pem -text -noout
    openssl x509 -in cert_chain.pem -text -noout

  6. The x509v3 Name Constraints portion of cert.pem should match the permitted and excluded name constraints you provided to the Python encoder earlier.
    Figure 5: Verifying the X509v3 name constraints in the newly issued certificate using openssl

    Figure 5: Verifying the X509v3 name constraints in the newly issued certificate using openssl

Install the name constraints certificate on the subordinate CA

In this section, you will install the name constraints certificate on your subordinate CA. Note that this will replace the existing certificate installed on the subordinate CA. The name constraints will go into effect as soon as the new certificate is installed.

To install the name constraints certificate

  1. Run the following command with your subordinate CA’s certificate-authority-arn and path to the cert.pem and cert_chain.pem files you created earlier.
    aws acm-pca import-certificate-authority-certificate \
    --certificate-authority-arn <arn:aws:acm-pca:us-west-2:111111111111:certificate-authority/111f1111-ba1b-1111-b11d-11ce1a11afae> \
    --certificate fileb://cert.pem \
    --certificate-chain fileb://cert_chain.pem 

  2. Run the following command with your subordinate CA’s certificate-authority-arn and region to get the CA’s status.
    aws acm-pca describe-certificate-authority \
    --certificate-authority-arn <arn:aws:acm-pca:us-west-2:111111111111:certificate-authority/cdd22222-2222-2f22-bb2e-222f222222ab> \
    --region <us-west-2> \
    --output json

  3. The output from the previous command will be similar to the following screenshot. The CertificateAuthorityConfiguration and highlighted NotBefore and NotAfter fields in the output should match the name constraints certificate.
    Figure 6: Verifying subordinate CA details using the AWS CLI

    Figure 6: Verifying subordinate CA details using the AWS CLI

Test the name constraints

Now that your subordinate CA has the new certificate installed, you can test to see if the name constraints are being enforced based on the certificate you installed in the previous section.

To request a certificate from your subordinate CA and test the applied name constraints

  1. To request a new certificate, update and run the following command with your subordinate CA’s certificate-authority-arn, region, and desired certificate subject in the domain-name argument.
    aws acm request-certificate \
    --certificate-authority-arn <arn:aws:acm-pca:us-west-2:111111111111:certificate-authority/cdd22222-2222-2f22-bb2e-222f222222ab> \
    --region <us-west-2> \
    --domain-name <app.prod.dev.example.com>

  2. If the request-certificate command is successful, it will output a certificate ARN. Take note of this ARN, because you will need it in the next step.
  3. Update and run the following command with the certificate-arn from the previous step and your region to get the status of the certificate request.
    aws acm describe-certificate \
    --certificate-arn <arn:aws:acm:us-west-2:11111111111:certificate/f11aa1dc-1111-1d1f-1afd-4cb11111b111> \
    --region <us-west-2>

  4. You will see output similar to the following screenshot if the requested certificate domain name was not permitted by the name constraints applied to your subordinate CA. In this example, a certificate for app.prod.dev.example.com was rejected. The Status shows “FAILED” and the FailureReason indicates “PCA_NAME_CONSTRAINTS_VALIDATION”.
    Figure 7: Verifying the status of the certificate request using the AWS CLI describe-certificate command

    Figure 7: Verifying the status of the certificate request using the AWS CLI describe-certificate command

Conclusion

In this blog post, you learned how to apply and test DNS name constraints in AWS Private CA. For additional information on this topic, review the AWS documentation on understanding certificate templates and instructions on how to issue a certificate with custom extensions using an APIPassthrough template. If you prefer to use code in Java language format, see Activate a subordinate CA with the NameConstraints extension.

If you have feedback about this post, submit comments in the Comments section below. If you have questions about this post, start a new thread on the AWS Security, Identity, & Compliance re:Post or contact AWS Support.

Want more AWS Security news? Follow us on Twitter.

Isaiah Schisler

Isaiah Schisler

Isaiah is a Security Consultant with AWS Professional Services. He’s an Air Force Veteran and currently helps organizations secure their cloud environments. He is passionate about security and automation.

Raul Radu

Raul Radu

Raul is a Senior Security Consultant with AWS Professional Services. He helps organizations secure their AWS environments and workloads in the cloud. He is passionate about privacy and security in a connected world.

Reduce the security and compliance risks of messaging apps with AWS Wickr

Post Syndicated from Anne Grahn original https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/security/reduce-the-security-and-compliance-risks-of-messaging-apps-with-aws-wickr/

Effective collaboration is central to business success, and employees today depend heavily on messaging tools. An estimated 3.09 billion mobile phone users access messaging applications (apps) to communicate, and this figure is projected to grow to 3.51 billion users in 2025.

This post highlights the risks associated with messaging apps and describes how you can use enterprise solutions — such as AWS Wickr — that combine end-to-end encryption with data retention to drive positive security and business outcomes.

The business risks of messaging apps

Evolving threats, flexible work models, and a growing patchwork of data protection and privacy regulations have made maintaining secure and compliant enterprise messaging a challenge.

The use of third-party apps for business-related messages on both corporate and personal devices can make it more difficult to verify that data is being adequately protected and retained. This can lead to business risk, particularly in industries with unique record-keeping requirements. Organizations in the financial services industry, for example, are subject to rules that include Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Rule 17a-4 and Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) Rule 3120, which require them to preserve all pertinent electronic communications.

A recent Gartner report on the viability of mobile bring-your-own-device (BYOD) programs noted, “It is now logical to assume that most financial services organizations with mobile BYOD programs for regulated employees could be fined due to a lack of compliance with electronic communications regulations.”

In the public sector, U.S. government agencies are subject to records requests under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and various state sunshine statutes. For these organizations, effectively retaining business messages is about more than supporting security and compliance—it’s about maintaining public trust.

Securing enterprise messaging

Enterprise-grade messaging apps can help you protect communications from unauthorized access and facilitate desired business outcomes.

Security — Critical security protocols protect messages and files that contain sensitive and proprietary data — such as personally identifiable information, protected health information, financial records, and intellectual property — in transit and at rest to decrease the likelihood of a security incident.

Control — Administrative controls allow you to add, remove, and invite users, and organize them into security groups with restricted access to features and content at their level. Passwords can be reset and profiles can be deleted remotely, helping you reduce the risk of data exposure stemming from a lost or stolen device.

Compliance — Information can be preserved in a customer-controlled data store to help meet requirements such as those that fall under the Federal Records Act (FRA) and National Archives and Records Administration (NARA), as well as SEC Rule 17a-4 and Sarbanes-Oxley (SOX).

Marrying encryption with data retention

Enterprise solutions bring end-to-end encryption and data retention together in support of a comprehensive approach to secure messaging that balances people, process, and technology.

End-to-end encryption

Many messaging apps offer some form of encryption, but not all of them use end-to-end encryption. End-to-end encryption is a secure communication method that protects data from unauthorized access, interception, or tampering as it travels from one endpoint to another.

In end-to-end encryption, encryption and decryption take place locally, on the device. Every call, message, and file is encrypted with unique keys and remains indecipherable in transit. Unauthorized parties cannot access communication content because they don’t have the keys required to decrypt the data.

Encryption in transit compared to end-to-end encryption

Encryption in transit encrypts data over a network from one point to another (typically between one client and one server); data might remain stored in plaintext at the source and destination storage systems. End-to-end encryption combines encryption in transit and encryption at rest to secure data at all times, from being generated and leaving the sender’s device, to arriving at the recipient’s device and being decrypted.

“Messaging is a critical tool for any organization, and end-to-end encryption is the security technology that provides organizations with the confidence they need to rely on it.” — CJ Moses, CISO and VP of Security Engineering at AWS

Data retention

While data retention is often thought of as being incompatible with end-to-end encryption, leading enterprise-grade messaging apps offer both, giving you the option to configure a data store of your choice to retain conversations without exposing them to outside parties. No one other than the intended recipients and your organization has access to the message content, giving you full control over your data.

How AWS can help

AWS Wickr is an end-to-end encrypted messaging and collaboration service that was built from the ground up with features designed to help you keep internal and external communications secure, private, and compliant. Wickr protects one-to-one and group messaging, voice and video calling, file sharing, screen sharing, and location sharing with 256-bit Advanced Encryption Standard (AES) encryption, and provides data retention capabilities.

Figure 1: How Wickr works

Figure 1: How Wickr works

With Wickr, each message gets a unique AES private encryption key, and a unique Elliptic-curve Diffie–Hellman (ECDH) public key to negotiate the key exchange with recipients. Message content — including text, files, audio, or video — is encrypted on the sending device (your iPhone, for example) using the message-specific AES key. This key is then exchanged via the ECDH key exchange mechanism, so that only intended recipients can decrypt the message.

“As former employees of federal law enforcement, the intelligence community, and the military, Qintel understands the need for enterprise-federated, secure communication messaging capabilities. When searching for our company’s messaging application we evaluated the market thoroughly and while there are some excellent capabilities available, none of them offer the enterprise security and administrative flexibility that Wickr does.”
Bill Schambura, CEO at Qintel

Wickr network administrators can configure and apply data retention to both internal and external communications in a Wickr network. This includes conversations with guest users, external teams, and other partner networks, so you can retain messages and files sent to and from the organization to help meet internal, legal, and regulatory requirements.

Figure 2: Data retention process

Figure 2: Data retention process

Data retention is implemented as an always-on recipient that is added to conversations, not unlike the blind carbon copy (BCC) feature in email. The data-retention process participates in the key exchange, allowing it to decrypt messages. The process can run anywhere: on-premises, on an Amazon Elastic Compute Cloud (Amazon EC2) instance, or at a location of your choice.

Wickr is a Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA)-eligible service, helping healthcare organizations and medical providers to conduct secure telehealth visits, send messages and files that contain protected health information, and facilitate real-time patient care.

Wickr networks can be created through the AWS Management Console, and workflows can be automated with Wickr bots. Wickr is currently available in the AWS US East (Northern Virginia), AWS GovCloud (US-West), AWS Canada (Central), and AWS Europe (London) Regions.

Keep your messages safe

Employees will continue to use messaging apps to chat with friends and family, and boost productivity at work. While many of these apps can introduce risks if not used properly in business settings, Wickr combines end-to-end encryption with data-retention capabilities to help you achieve security and compliance goals. Incorporating Wickr into a comprehensive approach to secure enterprise messaging that includes clear policies and security awareness training can help you to accelerate collaboration, while protecting your organization’s data.

To learn more and get started, visit the AWS Wickr webpage, or contact us.

Want more AWS Security news? Follow us on Twitter.

Anne Grahn

Anne Grahn

Anne is a Senior Worldwide Security GTM Specialist at AWS, based in Chicago. She has more than a decade of experience in the security industry, and focuses on effectively communicating cybersecurity risk. She maintains a Certified Information Systems Security Professional (CISSP) certification.

Tanvi Jain

Tanvi Jain

Tanvi is a Senior Technical Product Manager at AWS, based in New York. She focuses on building security-first features for customers, and is passionate about improving collaboration by building technology that is easy to use, scalable, and interoperable.

Establishing a data perimeter on AWS: Allow access to company data only from expected networks

Post Syndicated from Laura Reith original https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/security/establishing-a-data-perimeter-on-aws-allow-access-to-company-data-only-from-expected-networks/

A key part of protecting your organization’s non-public, sensitive data is to understand who can access it and from where. One of the common requirements is to restrict access to authorized users from known locations. To accomplish this, you should be familiar with the expected network access patterns and establish organization-wide guardrails to limit access to known networks. Additionally, you should verify that the credentials associated with your AWS Identity and Access Management (IAM) principals are only usable within these expected networks. On Amazon Web Services (AWS), you can use the network perimeter to apply network coarse-grained controls on your resources and principals. In this fourth blog post of the Establishing a data perimeter on AWS series, we explore the benefits and implementation considerations of defining your network perimeter.

The network perimeter is a set of coarse-grained controls that help you verify that your identities and resources can only be used from expected networks.

To achieve these security objectives, you first must define what expected networks means for your organization. Expected networks usually include approved networks your employees and applications use to access your resources, such as your corporate IP CIDR range and your VPCs. There are also scenarios where you need to permit access from networks of AWS services acting on your behalf or networks of trusted third-party partners that you integrate with. You should consider all intended data access patterns when you create the definition of expected networks. Other networks are considered unexpected and shouldn’t be allowed access.

Security risks addressed by the network perimeter

The network perimeter helps address the following security risks:

Unintended information disclosure through credential use from non-corporate networks

It’s important to consider the security implications of having developers with preconfigured access stored on their laptops. For example, let’s say that to access an application, a developer uses a command line interface (CLI) to assume a role and uses the temporary credentials to work on a new feature. The developer continues their work at a coffee shop that has great public Wi-Fi while their credentials are still valid. Accessing data through a non-corporate network means that they are potentially bypassing their company’s security controls, which might lead to the unintended disclosure of sensitive corporate data in a public space.

Unintended data access through stolen credentials

Organizations are prioritizing protection from credential theft risks, as threat actors can use stolen credentials to gain access to sensitive data. For example, a developer could mistakenly share credentials from an Amazon EC2 instance CLI access over email. After credentials are obtained, a threat actor can use them to access your resources and potentially exfiltrate your corporate data, possibly leading to reputational risk.

Figure 1 outlines an undesirable access pattern: using an employee corporate credential to access corporate resources (in this example, an Amazon Simple Storage Service (Amazon S3) bucket) from a non-corporate network.

Figure 1: Unintended access to your S3 bucket from outside the corporate network

Figure 1: Unintended access to your S3 bucket from outside the corporate network

Implementing the network perimeter

During the network perimeter implementation, you use IAM policies and global condition keys to help you control access to your resources based on which network the API request is coming from. IAM allows you to enforce the origin of a request by making an API call using both identity policies and resource policies.

The following two policies help you control both your principals and resources to verify that the request is coming from your expected network:

  • Service control policies (SCPs) are policies you can use to manage the maximum available permissions for your principals. SCPs help you verify that your accounts stay within your organization’s access control guidelines.
  • Resource based policies are policies that are attached to resources in each AWS account. With resource based policies, you can specify who has access to the resource and what actions they can perform on it. For a list of services that support resource based policies, see AWS services that work with IAM.

With the help of these two policy types, you can enforce the control objectives using the following IAM global condition keys:

  • aws:SourceIp: You can use this condition key to create a policy that only allows request from a specific IP CIDR range. For example, this key helps you define your expected networks as your corporate IP CIDR range.
  • aws:SourceVpc: This condition key helps you check whether the request comes from the list of VPCs that you specified in the policy. In a policy, this condition key is used to only allow access to an S3 bucket if the VPC where the request originated matches the VPC ID listed in your policy.
  • aws:SourceVpce: You can use this condition key to check if the request came from one of the VPC endpoints specified in your policy. Adding this key to your policy helps you restrict access to API calls that originate from VPC endpoints that belong to your organization.
  • aws:ViaAWSService: You can use this key to write a policy to allow an AWS service that uses your credentials to make calls on your behalf. For example, when you upload an object to Amazon S3 with server-side encryption with AWS Key Management Service (AWS KMS) on, S3 needs to encrypt the data on your behalf. To do this, S3 makes a subsequent request to AWS KMS to generate a data key to encrypt the object. The call that S3 makes to AWS KMS is signed with your credentials and originates outside of your network.
  • aws:PrincipalIsAWSService: This condition key helps you write a policy to allow AWS service principals to access your resources. For example, when you create an AWS CloudTrail trail with an S3 bucket as a destination, CloudTrail uses a service principal, cloudtrail.amazonaws.com, to publish logs to your S3 bucket. The API call from CloudTrail comes from the service network.

The following table summarizes the relationship between the control objectives and the capabilities used to implement the network perimeter.

Control objective Implemented by using Primary IAM capability
My resources can only be accessed from expected networks. Resource-based policies aws:SourceIp
aws:SourceVpc
aws:SourceVpce
aws:ViaAWSService
aws:PrincipalIsAWSService
My identities can access resources only from expected networks. SCPs aws:SourceIp
aws:SourceVpc
aws:SourceVpce
aws:ViaAWSService

My resources can only be accessed from expected networks

Start by implementing the network perimeter on your resources using resource based policies. The perimeter should be applied to all resources that support resource- based policies in each AWS account. With this type of policy, you can define which networks can be used to access the resources, helping prevent access to your company resources in case of valid credentials being used from non-corporate networks.

The following is an example of a resource-based policy for an S3 bucket that limits access only to expected networks using the aws:SourceIp, aws:SourceVpc, aws:PrincipalIsAWSService, and aws:ViaAWSService condition keys. Replace <my-data-bucket>, <my-corporate-cidr>, and <my-vpc> with your information.

{
  "Version": "2012-10-17",
  "Statement": [
    {
      "Sid": "EnforceNetworkPerimeter",
      "Effect": "Deny",
      "Principal": "*",
      "Action": "s3:*",
      "Resource": [
        "arn:aws:s3:::<my-data-bucket>",
        "arn:aws:s3:::<my-data-bucket>/*"
      ],
      "Condition": {
        "NotIpAddressIfExists": {
          "aws:SourceIp": "<my-corporate-cidr>"
        },
        "StringNotEqualsIfExists": {
          "aws:SourceVpc": "<my-vpc>"
        },
        "BoolIfExists": {
          "aws:PrincipalIsAWSService": "false",
          "aws:ViaAWSService": "false"
        }
      }
    }
  ]
}

The Deny statement in the preceding policy has four condition keys where all conditions must resolve to true to invoke the Deny effect. Use the IfExists condition operator to clearly state that each of these conditions will still resolve to true if the key is not present on the request context.

This policy will deny Amazon S3 actions unless requested from your corporate CIDR range (NotIpAddressIfExists with aws:SourceIp), or from your VPC (StringNotEqualsIfExists with aws:SourceVpc). Notice that aws:SourceVpc and aws:SourceVpce are only present on the request if the call was made through a VPC endpoint. So, you could also use the aws:SourceVpce condition key in the policy above, however this would mean listing every VPC endpoint in your environment. Since the number of VPC endpoints is greater than the number of VPCs, this example uses the aws:SourceVpc condition key.

This policy also creates a conditional exception for Amazon S3 actions requested by a service principal (BoolIfExists with aws:PrincipalIsAWSService), such as CloudTrail writing events to your S3 bucket, or by an AWS service on your behalf (BoolIfExists with aws:ViaAWSService), such as S3 calling AWS KMS to encrypt or decrypt an object.

Extending the network perimeter on resource

There are cases where you need to extend your perimeter to include AWS services that access your resources from outside your network. For example, if you’re replicating objects using S3 bucket replication, the calls to Amazon S3 originate from the service network outside of your VPC, using a service role. Another case where you need to extend your perimeter is if you integrate with trusted third-party partners that need access to your resources. If you’re using services with the described access pattern in your AWS environment or need to provide access to trusted partners, the policy EnforceNetworkPerimeter that you applied on your S3 bucket in the previous section will deny access to the resource.

In this section, you learn how to extend your network perimeter to include networks of AWS services using service roles to access your resources and trusted third-party partners.

AWS services that use service roles and service-linked roles to access resources on your behalf

Service roles are assumed by AWS services to perform actions on your behalf. An IAM administrator can create, change, and delete a service role from within IAM; this role exists within your AWS account and has an ARN like arn:aws:iam::<AccountNumber>:role/<RoleName>. A key difference between a service-linked role (SLR) and a service role is that the SLR is linked to a specific AWS service and you can view but not edit the permissions and trust policy of the role. An example is AWS Identity and Access Management Access Analyzer using an SLR to analyze resource metadata. To account for this access pattern, you can exempt roles on the service-linked role dedicated path arn:aws:iam::<AccountNumber>:role/aws-service-role/*, and for service roles, you can tag the role with the tag network-perimeter-exception set to true.

If you are exempting service roles in your policy based on a tag-value, you must also include a policy to enforce the identity perimeter on your resource as shown in this sample policy. This helps verify that only identities from your organization can access the resource and cannot circumvent your network perimeter controls with network-perimeter-exception tag.

Partners accessing your resources from their own networks

There might be situations where your company needs to grant access to trusted third parties. For example, providing a trusted partner access to data stored in your S3 bucket. You can account for this type of access by using the aws:PrincipalAccount condition key set to the account ID provided by your partner.

The following is an example of a resource-based policy for an S3 bucket that incorporates the two access patterns described above. Replace <my-data-bucket>, <my-corporate-cidr>, <my-vpc>, <third-party-account-a>, <third-party-account-b>, and <my-account-id> with your information.

{
    "Version": "2012-10-17",
    "Statement": [
        {
            "Sid": "EnforceNetworkPerimeter",
            "Principal": "*",
            "Action": "s3:*",
            "Effect": "Deny",
            "Resource": [
              "arn:aws:s3:::<my-data-bucket>",
              "arn:aws:s3:::<my-data-bucket>/*"
            ],
            "Condition": {
                "NotIpAddressIfExists": {
                  "aws:SourceIp": "<my-corporate-cidr>"
                },
                "StringNotEqualsIfExists": {
                    "aws:SourceVpc": "<my-vpc>",
       "aws:PrincipalTag/network-perimeter-exception": "true",
                    "aws:PrincipalAccount": [
                        "<third-party-account-a>",
                        "<third-party-account-b>"
                    ]
                },
                "BoolIfExists": {
                    "aws:PrincipalIsAWSService": "false",
                    "aws:ViaAWSService": "false"
                },
                "ArnNotLikeIfExists": {
                    "aws:PrincipalArn": "arn:aws:iam::<my-account-id>:role/aws-service-role/*"
                }
            }
        }
    ]
}

There are four condition operators in the policy above, and you need all four of them to resolve to true to invoke the Deny effect. Therefore, this policy only allows access to Amazon S3 from expected networks defined as: your corporate IP CIDR range (NotIpAddressIfExists and aws:SourceIp), your VPC (StringNotEqualsIfExists and aws:SourceVpc), networks of AWS service principals (aws:PrincipalIsAWSService), or an AWS service acting on your behalf (aws:ViaAWSService). It also allows access to networks of trusted third-party accounts (StringNotEqualsIfExists and aws:PrincipalAccount: <third-party-account-a>), and AWS services using an SLR to access your resources (ArnNotLikeIfExists and aws:PrincipalArn).

My identities can access resources only from expected networks

Applying the network perimeter on identity can be more challenging because you need to consider not only calls made directly by your principals, but also calls made by AWS services acting on your behalf. As described in access pattern 3 Intermediate IAM roles for data access in this blog post, many AWS services assume an AWS service role you created to perform actions on your behalf. The complicating factor is that even if the service supports VPC-based access to your data — for example AWS Glue jobs can be deployed within your VPC to access data in your S3 buckets — the service might also use the service role to make other API calls outside of your VPC. For example, with AWS Glue jobs, the service uses the service role to deploy elastic network interfaces (ENIs) in your VPC. However, these calls to create ENIs in your VPC are made from the AWS Glue managed network and not from within your expected network. A broad network restriction in your SCP for all your identities might prevent the AWS service from performing tasks on your behalf.

Therefore, the recommended approach is to only apply the perimeter to identities that represent the highest risk of inappropriate use based on other compensating controls that might exist in your environment. These are identities whose credentials can be obtained and misused by threat actors. For example, if you allow your developers access to the Amazon Elastic Compute Cloud (Amazon EC2) CLI, a developer can obtain credentials from the Amazon EC2 instance profile and use the credentials to access your resources from their own network.

To summarize, to enforce your network perimeter based on identity, evaluate your organization’s security posture and what compensating controls are in place. Then, according to this evaluation, identify which service roles or human roles have the highest risk of inappropriate use, and enforce the network perimeter on those identities by tagging them with data-perimeter-include set to true.

The following policy shows the use of tags to enforce the network perimeter on specific identities. Replace <my-corporate-cidr>, and <my-vpc> with your own information.

{
  "Version": "2012-10-17",
  "Statement": [
    {
      "Sid": "EnforceNetworkPerimeter",
      "Effect": "Deny",
      "Action": "*",
      "Resource": "*",
      "Condition": {
        "BoolIfExists": {
          "aws:ViaAWSService": "false"
        },
        "NotIpAddressIfExists": {
          "aws:SourceIp": [
            "<my-corporate-cidr>"
          ]
        },
        "StringNotEqualsIfExists": {
          "aws:SourceVpc": [
            "<my-vpc>"
          ]
        }, 
       "ArnNotLikeIfExists": {
          "aws:PrincipalArn": [
            "arn:aws:iam::*:role/aws:ec2-infrastructure"
          ]
        },
        "StringEquals": {
          "aws:PrincipalTag/data-perimeter-include": "true"
        }
      }
    }
  ]
}

The above policy statement uses the Deny effect to limit access to expected networks for identities with the tag data-perimeter-include attached to them (StringEquals and aws:PrincipalTag/data-perimeter-include set to true). This policy will deny access to those identities unless the request is done by an AWS service on your behalf (aws:ViaAWSService), is coming from your corporate CIDR range (NotIpAddressIfExists and aws:SourceIp), or is coming from your VPCs (StringNotEqualsIfExists with the aws:SourceVpc).

Amazon EC2 also uses a special service role, also known as infrastructure role, to decrypt Amazon Elastic Block Store (Amazon EBS). When you mount an encrypted Amazon EBS volume to an EC2 instance, EC2 calls AWS KMS to decrypt the data key that was used to encrypt the volume. The call to AWS KMS is signed by an IAM role, arn:aws:iam::*:role/aws:ec2-infrastructure, which is created in your account by EC2. For this use case, as you can see on the preceding policy, you can use the aws:PrincipalArn condition key to exclude this role from the perimeter.

IAM policy samples

This GitHub repository contains policy examples that illustrate how to implement network perimeter controls. The policy samples don’t represent a complete list of valid access patterns and are for reference only. They’re intended for you to tailor and extend to suit the needs of your environment. Make sure you thoroughly test the provided example policies before implementing them in your production environment.

Conclusion

In this blog post you learned about the elements needed to build the network perimeter, including policy examples and strategies on how to extend that perimeter. You now also know different access patterns used by AWS services that act on your behalf, how to evaluate those access patterns, and how to take a risk-based approach to apply the perimeter based on identities in your organization.

For additional learning opportunities, see the Data perimeters on AWS. This information resource provides additional materials such as a data perimeter workshop, blog posts, whitepapers, and webinar sessions.

If you have feedback about this post, submit comments in the Comments section below. If you have questions about this post, start a new thread on the AWS Security, Identity, & Compliance re:Post or contact AWS Support.

Want more AWS Security news? Follow us on Twitter.

Author

Laura Reith

Laura is an Identity Solutions Architect at Amazon Web Services. Before AWS, she worked as a Solutions Architect in Taiwan focusing on physical security and retail analytics.

Accelerating JVM cryptography with Amazon Corretto Crypto Provider 2

Post Syndicated from Will Childs-Klein original https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/security/accelerating-jvm-cryptography-with-amazon-corretto-crypto-provider-2/

Earlier this year, Amazon Web Services (AWS) released Amazon Corretto Crypto Provider (ACCP) 2, a cryptography provider built by AWS for Java virtual machine (JVM) applications. ACCP 2 delivers comprehensive performance enhancements, with some algorithms (such as elliptic curve key generation) seeing a greater than 13-fold improvement over ACCP 1. The new release also brings official support for the AWS Graviton family of processors. In this post, I’ll discuss a use case for ACCP, then review performance benchmarks to illustrate the performance gains. Finally, I’ll show you how to get started using ACCP 2 in applications today.

This release changes the backing cryptography library for ACCP from OpenSSL (used in ACCP 1) to the AWS open source cryptography library, AWS libcrypto (AWS-LC). AWS-LC has extensive formal verification, as well as traditional testing, to assure the correctness of cryptography that it provides. While AWS-LC and OpenSSL are largely compatible, there are some behavioral differences that required the ACCP major version increment to 2.

The move to AWS-LC also allows ACCP to leverage performance optimizations in AWS-LC for modern processors. I’ll illustrate the ACCP 2 performance enhancements through the use case of establishing a secure communications channel with Transport Layer Security version 1.3 (TLS 1.3). Specifically, I’ll examine cryptographic components of the connection’s initial phase, known as the handshake. TLS handshake latency particularly matters for large web service providers, but reducing the time it takes to perform various cryptographic operations is an operational win for any cryptography-intensive workload.

TLS 1.3 requires ephemeral key agreement, which means that a new key pair is generated and exchanged for every connection. During the TLS handshake, each party generates an ephemeral elliptic curve key pair, exchanges public keys using Elliptic Curve Diffie-Hellman (ECDH), and agrees on a shared secret. Finally, the client authenticates the server by verifying the Elliptic Curve Digital Signature Algorithm (ECDSA) signature in the certificate presented by the server after key exchange. All of this needs to happen before you can send data securely over the connection, so these operations directly impact handshake latency and must be fast.

Figure 1 shows benchmarks for the three elliptic curve algorithms that implement the TLS 1.3 handshake: elliptic curve key generation (up to 1,298% latency improvement in ACCP 2.0 over ACCP 1.6), ECDH key agreement (up to 858% latency improvement), and ECDSA digital signature verification (up to 260% latency improvement). These algorithms were benchmarked over three common elliptic curves with different key sizes on both ACCP 1 and ACCP 2. The choice of elliptic curve determines the size of the key used or generated by the algorithm, and key size correlates to performance. The following benchmarks were measured under the Amazon Corretto 11 JDK on a c7g.large instance running Amazon Linux with a Graviton 3 processor.

Figure 1: Percentage improvement of ACCP 2.0 over 1.6 performance benchmarks on c7g.large Amazon Linux Graviton 3

Figure 1: Percentage improvement of ACCP 2.0 over 1.6 performance benchmarks on c7g.large Amazon Linux Graviton 3

The performance improvements due to the optimization of secp384r1 in AWS-LC are particularly noteworthy.

Getting started

Whether you’re introducing ACCP to your project or upgrading from ACCP 1, start the onboarding process for ACCP 2 by updating your dependency manager configuration in your development or testing environment. The Maven and Gradle examples below assume that you’re using linux on an ARM64 processor. If you’re using an x86 processor, substitute linux-x86_64 for linux-aarch64. After you’ve performed this update, sync your application’s dependencies and install ACCP in your JVM process. ACCP can be installed either by specifying our recommended security.properties file in your JVM invocation or programmatically at runtime. The following sections provide more details about all of these steps.

After ACCP has been installed, the Java Cryptography Architecture (JCA) will look for cryptographic implementations in ACCP first before moving on to other providers. So, as long as your application and dependencies obtain algorithms supported by ACCP from the JCA, your application should gain the benefits of ACCP 2 without further configuration or code changes.

Maven

If you’re using Maven to manage dependencies, add or update the following dependency configuration in your pom.xml file.

<dependency>
  <groupId>software.amazon.cryptools</groupId>
  <artifactId>AmazonCorrettoCryptoProvider</artifactId>
  <version>[2.0,3.0)</version>
  <classifier>linux-aarch64</classifier>
</dependency>

Gradle

For Gradle, add or update the following dependency in your build.gradle file.

dependencies {
    implementation 'software.amazon.cryptools:AmazonCorrettoCryptoProvider:2.+:linux-aarch64'
}

Install through security properties

After updating your dependency manager, you’ll need to install ACCP. You can install ACCP using security properties as described in our GitHub repository. This installation method is a good option for users who have control over their JVM invocation.

Install programmatically

If you don’t have control over your JVM invocation, you can install ACCP programmatically. For Java applications, add the following code to your application’s initialization logic (optionally performing a health check).

com.amazon.corretto.crypto.provider.AmazonCorrettoCryptoProvider.install();
com.amazon.corretto.crypto.provider.AmazonCorrettoCryptoProvider.INSTANCE.assertHealthy();

Migrating from ACCP 1 to ACCP 2

Although the migration path to version 2 is straightforward for most ACCP 1 users, ACCP 2 ends support for some outdated algorithms: a finite field Diffie-Hellman key agreement, finite field DSA signatures, and a National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)-specified random number generator. The removal of these algorithms is not backwards compatible, so you’ll need to check your code for their usage and, if you do find usage, either migrate to more modern algorithms provided by ACCP 2 or obtain implementations from a different provider, such as one of the default providers that ships with the JDK.

Check your code

Search for unsupported algorithms in your application code by their JCA names:

  • DH: Finite-field Diffie-Hellman key agreement
  • DSA: Finite-field Digital Signature Algorithm
  • NIST800-90A/AES-CTR-256: NIST-specified random number generator

Use ACCP 2 supported algorithms

Where possible, use these supported algorithms in your application code:

  • ECDH for key agreement instead of DH
  • ECDSA or RSA for signatures instead of DSA
  • Default SecureRandom instead of NIST800-90A/AES-CTR-256

If your use case requires the now-unsupported algorithms, check whether any of those algorithms are explicitly requested from ACCP.

  • If ACCP is not explicitly named as the provider, then you should be able to transparently fall back to another provider without a code change.
  • If ACCP is explicitly named as the provider, then remove that provider specification and register a different provider that offers the algorithm. This will allow the JCA to obtain an implementation from another registered provider without breaking backwards compatibility in your application.

Test your code

Some behavioral differences exist between ACCP 2 and other providers, including ACCP 1 (backed by OpenSSL). After onboarding or migrating, it’s important that you test your application code thoroughly to identify potential incompatibilities between cryptography providers.

Conclusion

Integrate ACCP 2 into your application today to benefit from AWS-LC’s security assurance and performance improvements. For a full list of changes, see the ACCP CHANGELOG on GitHub. Linux builds of ACCP 2 are now available on Maven Central for aarch64 and x86-64 processor architectures. If you encounter any issues with your integration, or have any feature suggestions, please reach out to us on GitHub by filing an issue.

 
If you have feedback about this post, submit comments in the Comments section below.

Want more AWS Security news? Follow us on Twitter.

Will Childs-Klein

Will Childs-Klein

Will is a Senior Software Engineer at AWS Cryptography, where he focuses on developing cryptographic libraries, optimizing software performance, and deploying post-quantum cryptography. Previously at AWS, he worked on data storage and transfer services including Storage Gateway, Elastic File System, and DataSync.

Discover the benefits of AWS WAF advanced rate-based rules

Post Syndicated from Rodrigo Ferroni original https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/security/discover-the-benefits-of-aws-waf-advanced-rate-based-rules/

In 2017, AWS announced the release of Rate-based Rules for AWS WAF, a new rule type that helps protect websites and APIs from application-level threats such as distributed denial of service (DDoS) attacks, brute force log-in attempts, and bad bots. Rate-based rules track the rate of requests for each originating IP address and invokes a rule action on IPs with rates that exceed a set limit.

While rate-based rules are useful to detect and mitigate a broad variety of bad actors, threats have evolved to bypass request-rate limit rules. For example, one bypass technique is to send a high volumes of requests by spreading them across thousands of unique IP addresses.

In May 2023, AWS announced AWS WAF enhancements to the existing rate-based rules feature that you can use to create more dynamic and intelligent rules by using additional HTTP request attributes for request rate limiting. For example, you can now choose from the following predefined keys to configure your rules: label namespace, header, cookie, query parameter, query string, HTTP method, URI path and source IP Address or IP Address in a header. Additionally, you can combine up to five composite keys as parameters for stronger rule development. These rule definition enhancements help improve perimeter security measures against sophisticated application-layer DDoS attacks using AWS WAF. For more information about the supported request attributes, see Rate-based rule statement in the AWS WAF Developer Guide.

In this blog post, you will learn more about these new AWS WAF feature enhancements and how you can use alternative request attributes to create more robust and granular sets of rules. In addition, you’ll learn how to combine keys to create a composite aggregation key to uniquely identify a specific combination of elements to improve rate tracking.

Getting started

Configuring advanced rate-based rules is similar to configuring simple rate-based rules. The process starts with creating a new custom rule of type rate-based rule, entering the rate limit value, selecting custom keys, choosing the key from the request aggregation key dropdown menu, and adding additional composite keys by choosing Add a request aggregation key as shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1: Creating an advanced rate-based rule with two aggregation keys

Figure 1: Creating an advanced rate-based rule with two aggregation keys

For existing rules, you can update those rate-based rules to use the new functionality by editing them. For example, you can add a header to be aggregated with the source IP address, as shown in Figure 2. Note that previously created rules will not be modified.

Figure 2: Add a second key to an existing rate-based rule

Figure 2: Add a second key to an existing rate-based rule

You still can set the same rule action, such as block, count, captcha, or challenge. Optionally, you can continue applying a scope-down statement to limit rule action. For example, you can limit the scope to a certain application path or requests with a specified header. You can scope down the inspection criteria so that only certain requests are counted towards rate limiting, and use certain keys to aggregate those requests together. A technique would be to count only requests that have /api at the start of the URI, and aggregate them based on their SessionId cookie value.

Target use cases

Now that you’re familiar with the foundations of advanced rate-based rules, let’s explore how they can improve your security posture using the following use cases:

  • Enhanced Application (Layer 7) DDoS protection
  • Improved API security
  • Enriched request throttling

Use case 1: Enhance Layer 7 DDoS mitigation

The first use case that you might find beneficial is to enhance Layer 7 DDoS mitigation. An HTTP request flood is the most common vector of DDoS attacks. This attack type aims to affect application availability by exhausting available resources to run the application.

Before the release of these enhancements to AWS WAF rules, rules were limited by aggregating requests based on the IP address from the request origin or configured to use a forwarded IP address in an HTTP header such as X-Forwarded-For. Now you can create a more robust rate-based rule to help protect your web application from DDoS attacks by tracking requests based on a different key or a combination of keys. Let’s examine some examples.

To help detect pervasive bots, such as scrapers, scanners, and crawlers, or common bots that are distributed across many unique IP addresses, a rule can look for static request data like a custom header — for example, User-Agent.

Key 1: Custom header (User-Agent)

{
  "Name": "test-rbr",
  "Priority": 0,
  "Statement": {
    "RateBasedStatement": {
      "Limit": 2000,
      "AggregateKeyType": "CUSTOM_KEYS",
      "CustomKeys": [
        {
          "Header": {
            "Name": "User-Agent",
            "TextTransformations": [
              {
                "Priority": 0,
                "Type": "NONE"
              }
            ]
          }
        }
      ]
    }
  },
  "Action": {
    "Block": {}
  },
  "VisibilityConfig": {
    "SampledRequestsEnabled": true,
    "CloudWatchMetricsEnabled": true,
    "MetricName": "test-rbr"
  }
}

To help you decide what unique key to use, you can analyze AWS WAF logs. For more information, review Examples 2 and 3 in the blog post Analyzing AWS WAF Logs in Amazon CloudWatch Logs.

To uniquely identity users behind a NAT gateway, you can use a cookie in addition to an IP address. Before the aggregation keys feature, it was difficult to identify users who connected from a single IP address. Now, you can use the session cookie to aggregate requests by their session identifier and IP address.

Note that for Layer 7 DDoS mitigation, tracking by session ID in cookies can be circumvented, because bots might send random values or not send any cookie at all. It’s a good idea to keep an IP-based blanket rate-limiting rule to block offending IP addresses that reach a certain high rate, regardless of their request attributes. In that case, the keys would look like:

  • Key 1: Session cookie
  • Key 2: IP address

You can reduce false positives when using AWS Managed Rules (AMR) IP reputation lists by rate limiting based on their label namespace. Labelling functionality is a powerful feature that allows you to map the requests that match a specific pattern and apply custom rules to them. In this case, you can match the label namespace provided by the AMR IP reputation list that includes AWSManagedIPDDoSList, which is a list of IP addresses that have been identified as actively engaging in DDoS activities.

You might want to be cautious about using this group list in block mode, because there’s a chance of blocking legitimate users. To mitigate this, use the list in count mode and create an advanced rate-based rule to aggregate all requests with the label namespace awswaf:managed:aws:amazon-ip-list:, targeting captcha as the rule action. This lets you reduce false positives without compromising security. Applying captcha as an action for the rule reduces serving captcha to all users and instead only applies it when the rate of requests exceeds the defined limit. The key for this rule would be:

  • Labels (AMR IP reputation lists).

Use case 2: API security

In this second use case, you learn how to use an advanced rate-based rule to improve the security of an API. Protecting an API with rate-limiting rules helps ensure that requests aren’t being sent too frequently in a short amount of time. Reducing the risk from misusing an API helps to ensure that only legitimate requests are handled and not denied due to an overload of requests.

Now, you can create advanced rate-based rules that track API requests based on two aggregation keys. For example, HTTP method to differentiate between GET, POST, and other requests in combination with a custom header like Authorization to match a JSON Web Token (JWT). JWTs are not decrypted by AWS WAF, and AWS WAF only aggregates requests with the same token. This can help to ensure that a token is not being used maliciously or to bypass rate-limiting rules. An additional benefit of this configuration is that requests with no authorization headers are being aggregated together towards the rate limiting threshold. The keys for this use case are:

  • Key 1: HTTP method
  • Key 2: Custom header (Authorization)

In addition, you can configure a rule to block and add a custom response when the requests limit is reached. For example, by returning HTTP error code 429 (too many requests) with a Retry-After header indicating the requester should wait 900 seconds (15 minutes) before making a new request.

{
  "Name": "test-rbr",
  "Priority": 0,
  "Statement": {
    "RateBasedStatement": {
      "Limit": 600,
      "AggregateKeyType": "CUSTOM_KEYS",
      "CustomKeys": [
        {
          "HTTPMethod": {}
        },
        {
          "Header": {
            "Name": "Authorization",
            "TextTransformations": [
              {
                "Priority": 0,
                "Type": "NONE"
              }
            ]
          }
        }
      ]
    }
  },
  "Action": {
    "Block": {
      "CustomResponse": {
        "ResponseCode": 429,
        "ResponseHeaders": [
          {
            "Name": "Retry-After",
            "Value": "900"
          }
        ]
      }
    }
  },
  "VisibilityConfig": {
    "SampledRequestsEnabled": true,
    "CloudWatchMetricsEnabled": true,
    "MetricName": "test-rbr"
  }
}

Use case 3: Implement request throttling

There are many situations where throttling should be considered. For example, if you want to maintain the performance of a service API by providing fair usage for all users, you can have different rate limits based on the type or purpose of the API, such as mutable or non-mutable requests. To achieve this, you can create two advanced rate-based rules using aggregation keys like IP address, combined with an HTTP request parameter for either mutable or non-mutable that indicates the type of request. Each rule will have its own HTTP request parameter, and you can set different maximum values for the rate limit. The keys for this use case are:

  • Key 1: HTTP request parameter
  • Key 2: IP address

Another example where throttling can be helpful is for a multi-tenant application where you want to track requests made by each tenant’s users. Let’s say you have a free tier but also a paying subscription model for which you want to allow a higher request rate. For this use case, it’s recommended to use two different URI paths to verify that the two tenants are kept separated. Additionally, it is advised to still use a custom header or query string parameter to differentiate between the two tenants, such as a tenant-id header or parameter that contains a unique identifier for each tenant. To implement this type of throttling using advanced rate-based rules, you can create two rules using an IP address in combination with the custom header as aggregation keys. Each rule can have its own maximum value for rate limiting, as well as a scope-down statement that matches requests for each URI path. The keys and scope-down statement for this use case are:

  • Key 1: Custom header (tenant-id)
  • Key 2: IP address
  • Scope down statement (URI path)

As a third example, you can rate-limit web applications based on the total number of requests that can be handled. For this use case, you can use the new Count all as aggregation option. The option counts and rate-limits the requests that match the rule’s scope-down statement, which is required for this type of aggregation. One option is to scope down and inspect the URI path to target a specific functionality like a /history-search page. An option when you need to control how many requests go to a specific domain is to scope down a single header to a specific host, creating one rule for a.example.com and another rule for b.example.com.

  • Request Aggregation: Count all
  • Scope down statement (URI path | Single header)

For these examples, you can block with a custom response when the requests exceed the limit. For example, by returning the same HTTP error code and header, but adding a custom response body with a message like “You have reached the maximum number of requests allowed.”

Logging

The AWS WAF logs now include additional information about request keys used for request-rate tracking and the values of matched request keys. In addition to the existing IP or Forwarded_IP values, you can see the updated log fields limitKey and customValue, where the limitKey field now shows either CustomKeys for custom aggregate key settings or Constant for count all requests. CustomValues shows an array of keys, names, and values.

Figure 3: Example log output for the advanced rate-based rule showing updated limitKey and customValues fields

Figure 3: Example log output for the advanced rate-based rule showing updated limitKey and customValues fields

As mentioned in the first use case, to get more detailed information about the traffic that’s analyzed by the web ACL, consider enabling logging. If you choose to enable Amazon CloudWatch Logs as the log destination, you can use CloudWatch Logs Insights and advanced queries to interactively search and analyze logs.

For example, you can use the following query to get the request information that matches rate-based rules, including the updated keys and values, directly from the AWS WAF console.

| fields terminatingRuleId as RuleName
| filter terminatingRuleType ="RATE_BASED" 
| parse @message ',"customValues":[*],' as customKeys
| limit 100

Figure 4 shows the CloudWatch Log Insights query and the logs output including custom keys, names, and values fields.

Figure 4: The CloudWatch Log Insights query and the logs output

Figure 4: The CloudWatch Log Insights query and the logs output

Pricing

There is no additional cost for using advanced rate-base rules; standard AWS WAF pricing applies when you use this feature. For AWS WAF pricing information, see AWS WAF Pricing. You only need to be aware that using aggregation keys will increase AWS WAF web ACL capacity units (WCU) usage for the rule. WCU usage is calculated based on how many keys you want to use for rate limiting. The current model of 2 WCUs plus any additional WCUs for a nested statement is being updated to 2 WCUs as a base, and 30 WCUs for each custom aggregation key that you specify. For example, if you want to create aggregation keys with an IP address in combination with a session cookie, this will use 62 WCUs, and aggregation keys with an IP address, session cookie, and customer header will use 92 WCUs. For more details about the WCU-based cost structure, visit Rate-based rule statement in the AWS WAF Developer Guide.

Conclusion

In this blog post, you learned about AWS WAF enhancements to existing rate-based rules that now support request parameters in addition to IP addresses. Additionally, these enhancements allow you to create composite keys based on up to five request parameters. This new capability allows you to be either more coarse in aggregating requests (such as all the requests that have an IP reputation label associated with them) or finer (such as aggregate requests for a specific session ID, not its IP address).

For more rule examples that include JSON rule configuration, visit Rate-based rule examples in the AWS WAF Developer Guide.

 
If you have feedback about this post, submit comments in the Comments section below. If you have questions about this post, contact AWS Support.

Want more AWS Security news? Follow us on Twitter.

Author

Rodrigo Ferroni

Rodrigo is a senior Security Specialist at AWS Enterprise Support. He is certified in CISSP, an AWS Security Specialist, and an AWS Solutions Architect Associate. He enjoys helping customers continue adopting AWS security services to improve their security posture in the cloud. Outside of work, he loves to travel as much as he can. In winter, he enjoys snowboarding with his friends.

Maksim Akifev

Maksim Akifev

Maksim is a Senior Product Manager at AWS WAF, partnering with businesses ranging from startups to enterprises to enhance their web application security. Maksim prioritizes quality, security, and user experience. He’s enthusiastic about innovative technology that expedites digital growth for businesses.

Embracing our broad responsibility for securing digital infrastructure in the European Union

Post Syndicated from Frank Adelmann original https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/security/embracing-our-broad-responsibility-for-securing-digital-infrastructure-in-the-european-union/

Over the past few decades, digital technologies have brought tremendous benefits to our societies, governments, businesses, and everyday lives. However, the more we depend on them for critical applications, the more we must do so securely. The increasing reliance on these systems comes with a broad responsibility for society, companies, and governments.

At Amazon Web Services (AWS), every employee, regardless of their role, works to verify that security is an integral component of every facet of the business (see Security at AWS). This goes hand-in-hand with new cybersecurity-related regulations, such as the Directive on Measures for a High Common Level of Cybersecurity Across the Union (NIS 2), formally adopted by the European Parliament and the Counsel of the European Union (EU) in December 2022. NIS 2 will be transposed into the national laws of the EU Member States by October 2024, and aims to strengthen cybersecurity across the EU.

AWS is excited to help customers become more resilient, and we look forward to even closer cooperation with national cybersecurity authorities to raise the bar on cybersecurity across Europe. Building society’s trust in the online environment is key to harnessing the power of innovation for social and economic development. It’s also one of our core Leadership Principles: Success and scale bring broad responsibility.

Compliance with NIS 2

NIS 2 seeks to ensure that entities mitigate the risks posed by cyber threats, minimize the impact of incidents, and protect the continuity of essential and important services in the EU.

Besides increased cooperation between authorities and support for enhanced information sharing amongst covered entities, NIS 2 includes minimum requirements for cybersecurity risk management measures and reporting obligations, which are applicable to a broad range of AWS customers based on their sector. Examples of sectors that must comply with NIS 2 requirements are energy, transport, health, public administration, and digital infrastructures. For the full list of covered sectors, see Annexes I and II of NIS 2. Generally, the NIS 2 Directive applies to a wider pool of entities than those currently covered by the NIS Directive, including medium-sized enterprises, as defined in Article 2 of the Annex to Recommendation 2003/361/EC (over 50 employees or an annual turnover over €10 million).

In several countries, aspects of the AWS service offerings are already part of the national critical infrastructure. For example, in Germany, Amazon Elastic Compute Cloud (Amazon EC2) and Amazon CloudFront are in scope for the KRITIS regulation. For several years, AWS has fulfilled its obligations to secure these services, run audits related to national critical infrastructure, and have established channels for exchanging security information with the German Federal Office for Information Security (BSI) KRITIS office. AWS is also part of the UP KRITIS initiative, a cooperative effort between industry and the German Government to set industry standards.

AWS will continue to support customers in implementing resilient solutions, in accordance with the shared responsibility model. Compliance efforts within AWS will include implementing the requirements of the act and setting out technical and methodological requirements for cloud computing service providers, to be published by the European Commission, as foreseen in Article 21 of NIS 2.

AWS cybersecurity risk management – Current status

Even before the introduction of NIS 2, AWS has been helping customers improve their resilience and incident response capacities. Our core infrastructure is designed to satisfy the security requirements of the military, global banks, and other highly sensitive organizations.

AWS provides information and communication technology services and building blocks that businesses, public authorities, universities, and individuals use to become more secure, innovative, and responsive to their own needs and the needs of their customers. Security and compliance remain a shared responsibility between AWS and the customer. We make sure that the AWS cloud infrastructure complies with applicable regulatory requirements and good practices for cloud providers, and customers remain responsible for building compliant workloads in the cloud.

In total, AWS supports or has obtained over 143 security standards compliance certifications and attestations around the globe, such as ISO 27001, ISO 22301, ISO 20000, ISO 27017, and System and Organization Controls (SOC) 2. The following are some examples of European certifications and attestations that we’ve achieved:

  • C5 — provides a wide-ranging control framework for establishing and evidencing the security of cloud operations in Germany.
  • ENS High — comprises principles for adequate protection applicable to government agencies and public organizations in Spain.
  • HDS — demonstrates an adequate framework for technical and governance measures to secure and protect personal health data, governed by French law.
  • Pinakes — provides a rating framework intended to manage and monitor the cybersecurity controls of service providers upon which Spanish financial entities depend.

These and other AWS Compliance Programs help customers understand the robust controls in place at AWS to help ensure the security and compliance of the cloud. Through dedicated teams, we’re prepared to provide assurance about the approach that AWS has taken to operational resilience and to help customers achieve assurance about the security and resiliency of their workloads. AWS Artifact provides on-demand access to these security and compliance reports and many more.

For security in the cloud, it’s crucial for our customers to make security by design and security by default central tenets of product development. To begin with, customers can use the AWS Well-Architected tool to help build secure, high-performing, resilient, and efficient infrastructure for a variety of applications and workloads. Customers that use the AWS Cloud Adoption Framework (AWS CAF) can improve cloud readiness by identifying and prioritizing transformation opportunities. These foundational resources help customers secure regulated workloads. AWS Security Hub provides customers with a comprehensive view of their security state on AWS and helps them check their environments against industry standards and good practices.

With regards to the cybersecurity risk management measures and reporting obligations that NIS 2 mandates, existing AWS service offerings can help customers fulfill their part of the shared responsibility model and comply with future national implementations of NIS 2. For example, customers can use Amazon GuardDuty to detect a set of specific threats to AWS accounts and watch out for malicious activity. Amazon CloudWatch helps customers monitor the state of their AWS resources. With AWS Config, customers can continually assess, audit, and evaluate the configurations and relationships of selected resources on AWS, on premises, and on other clouds. Furthermore, AWS Whitepapers, such as the AWS Security Incident Response Guide, help customers understand, implement, and manage fundamental security concepts in their cloud architecture.

NIS 2 foresees the development and implementation of comprehensive cybersecurity awareness training programs for management bodies and employees. At AWS, we provide various training programs at no cost to the public to increase awareness on cybersecurity, such as the Amazon cybersecurity awareness training, AWS Cloud Security Learning, AWS re/Start, and AWS Ramp-Up Guides.

AWS cooperation with authorities

At Amazon, we strive to be the world’s most customer-centric company. For AWS Security Assurance, that means having teams that continuously engage with authorities to understand and exceed regulatory and customer obligations on behalf of customers. This is just one way that we raise the security bar in Europe. At the same time, we recommend that national regulators carefully assess potentially conflicting, overlapping, or contradictory measures.

We also cooperate with cybersecurity agencies around the globe because we recognize the importance of their role in keeping the world safe. To that end, we have built the Global Cybersecurity Program (GCSP) to provide agencies with a direct and consistent line of communication to the AWS Security team. Two examples of GCSP members are the Dutch National Cyber Security Centrum (NCSC-NL), with whom we signed a cooperation in May 2023, and the Italian National Cybersecurity Agency (ACN). Together, we will work on cybersecurity initiatives and strengthen the cybersecurity posture across the EU. With the war in Ukraine, we have experienced how important such a collaboration can be. AWS has played an important role in helping Ukraine’s government maintain continuity and provide critical services to citizens since the onset of the war.

The way forward

At AWS, we will continue to provide key stakeholders with greater insights into how we help customers tackle their most challenging cybersecurity issues and provide opportunities to deep dive into what we’re building. We very much look forward to continuing our work with authorities, agencies and, most importantly, our customers to provide for the best solutions and raise the bar on cybersecurity and resilience across the EU and globally.

 
If you have feedback about this post, submit comments in the Comments section below. If you have questions about this post, contact AWS Support.

Want more AWS Security news? Follow us on Twitter.

Frank Adelmann

Frank Adelmann

Frank is the Regulated Industry and Security Engagement Lead for Regulated Commercial Sectors in Europe. He joined AWS in 2022 after working as a regulator in the European financial sector, technical advisor on cybersecurity matters in the International Monetary Fund, and Head of Information Security in the European Commodity Clearing AG. Today, Frank is passionately engaging with European regulators to understand and exceed regulatory and customer expectations.

Two real-life examples of why limiting permissions works: Lessons from AWS CIRT

Post Syndicated from Richard Billington original https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/security/two-real-life-examples-of-why-limiting-permissions-works-lessons-from-aws-cirt/

Welcome to another blog post from the AWS Customer Incident Response Team (CIRT)! For this post, we’re looking at two events that the team was involved in from the viewpoint of a regularly discussed but sometimes misunderstood subject, least privilege. Specifically, we consider the idea that the benefit of reducing permissions in real-life use cases does not always require using the absolute minimum set of privileges. Instead, you need to weigh the cost and effort of creating and maintaining privileges against the risk reduction that is achieved, to make sure that your permissions are appropriate for your needs.

To quote VP and Distinguished Engineer at Amazon Security, Eric Brandwine, “Least privilege equals maximum effort.” This is the idea that creating and maintaining the smallest possible set of privileges needed to perform a given task will require the largest amount of effort, especially as customer needs and service features change over time. However, the correlation between effort and permission reduction is not linear. So, the question you should be asking is: How do you balance the effort of privilege reduction with the benefits it provides?

Unfortunately, this is not an easy question to answer. You need to consider the likelihood of an unwanted issue happening, the impact if that issue did happen, and the cost and effort to prevent (or detect and recover from) that issue. You also need to factor requirements such as your business goals and regulatory requirements into your decision process. Of course, you won’t need to consider just one potential issue, but many. Often it can be useful to start with a rough set of permissions and refine them down as you develop your knowledge of what security level is required. You can also use service control policies (SCPs) to provide a set of permission guardrails if you’re using AWS Organizations. In this post, we tell two real-world stories where limiting AWS Identity and Access Management (IAM) permissions worked by limiting the impact of a security event, but where the permission set did not involve maximum effort.

Story 1: On the hunt for credentials

In this AWS CIRT story, we see how a threat actor was unable to achieve their goal because the access they obtained — a database administrator’s — did not have the IAM permissions they were after.

Background and AWS CIRT engagement

A customer came to us after they discovered unauthorized activity in their on-premises systems and in some of their AWS accounts. They had incident response capability and were looking for an additional set of hands with AWS knowledge to help them with their investigation. This helped to free up the customer’s staff to focus on the on-premises analysis.

Before our engagement, the customer had already performed initial containment activities. This included rotating credentials, revoking temporary credentials, and isolating impacted systems. They also had a good idea of which federated user accounts had been accessed by the threat actor.

The key part of every AWS CIRT engagement is the customer’s ask. Everything our team does falls on the customer side of the AWS Shared Responsibility Model, so we want to make sure that we are aligned to the customer’s desired outcome. The ask was clear—review the potential unauthorized federated users’ access, and investigate the unwanted AWS actions that were taken by those users during the known timeframe. To get a better idea of what was “unwanted,” we talked to the customer to understand at a high level what a typical day would entail for these users, to get some context around what sort of actions would be expected. The users were primarily focused on working with Amazon Relational Database Service (RDS).

Analysis and findings

For this part of the story, we’ll focus on a single federated user whose apparent actions we investigated, because the other federated users had not been impersonated by the threat actor in a meaningful way. We knew the approximate start and end dates to focus on and had discovered that the threat actor had performed a number of unwanted actions.

After reviewing the actions, it was clear that the threat actor had performed a console sign-in on three separate occasions within a 2-hour window. Each time, the threat actor attempted to perform a subset of the following actions:

Note: This list includes only the actions that are displayed as readOnly = false in AWS CloudTrail, because these actions are often (but not always) the more impactful ones, with the potential to change the AWS environment.

This is the point where the benefit of permission restriction became clear. As soon as this list was compiled, we noticed that two fields were present for all of the actions listed:

"errorCode": "Client.UnauthorizedOperation",
"errorMessage": "You are not authorized to perform this operation. [rest of message]"

As this reveals, every single non-readOnly action that was attempted by the threat actor was denied because the federated user account did not have the required IAM permissions.

Customer communication and result

After we confirmed the findings, we had a call with the customer to discuss the results. As you can imagine, they were happy that the results showed no material impact to their data, and said no further investigation or actions were required at that time.

What were the IAM permissions the federated user had, which prevented the set of actions the threat actor attempted?

The answer did not actually involve the absolute minimal set of permissions required by the user to do their job. It’s simply that the federated user had a role that didn’t have an Allow statement for the IAM actions the threat actor tried — their job did not require them. Without an explicit Allow statement, the IAM actions attempted were denied because IAM policies are Deny by default. In this instance, simply not having the desired IAM permissions meant that the threat actor wasn’t able to achieve their goal, and stopped using the access. We’ll never know what their goal actually was, but trying to create access keys, passwords, and update policies means that a fair guess would be that they were attempting to create another way to access that AWS account.

Story 2: More instances for crypto mining

In this AWS CIRT story, we see how a threat actor’s inability to create additional Amazon Elastic Compute Cloud (Amazon EC2) instances resulted in the threat actor leaving without achieving their goal.

Background and AWS CIRT engagement

Our second story involves a customer who had an AWS account they were using to test some new third-party software that uses Amazon Elastic Container Service (Amazon ECS). This customer had Amazon GuardDuty turned on, and found that they were getting GuardDuty alerts for CryptoCurrency:EC2/BitcoinTool related findings.

Because this account was new and currently only used for testing their software, the customer saw that the detection was related to the Amazon ECS cluster and decided to delete all the resources in the account and rebuild. Not too long after doing this, they received a similar GuardDuty alert for the new Amazon ECS cluster they had set up. The second finding resulted in the customer’s security team and AWS being brought in to try to understand what was causing this. The customer’s security team was focused on reviewing the tasks that were being run on the cluster, while AWS CIRT reviewed the AWS account actions and provided insight about the GuardDuty finding and what could have caused it.

Analysis and findings

Working with the customer, it wasn’t long before we discovered that the 3rd party Amazon ECS task definition that the customer was using, was unintentionally exposing a web interface to the internet. That interface allowed unauthenticated users to run commands on the system. This explained why the same alert was also received shortly after the new install had been completed.

This is where the story takes a turn for the better. The AWS CIRT analysis of the AWS CloudTrail logs found that there were a number of attempts to use the credentials of the Task IAM role that was associated with the Amazon ECS task. The majority of actions were attempting to launch multiple Amazon EC2 instances via RunInstances calls. Every one of these actions, along with the other actions attempted, failed with either a Client.UnauthorizedOperation or an AccessDenied error message.

Next, we worked with the customer to understand the permissions provided by the Task IAM role. Once again, the permissions could have been limited more tightly. However, this time the goal of the threat actor — running a number of Amazon EC2 instances (most likely for surreptitious crypto mining) — did not align with the policy given to the role:

{
    "Version": "2012-10-17",
    "Statement": [
        {
          "Effect": "Allow",
          "Action": "s3:*",
          "Resource": "*"
        }
    ]
}

AWS CIRT recommended creating policies to restrict the allowed actions further, providing specific resources where possible, and potentially also adding in some conditions to limit other aspects of the access (such as the two Condition keys launched recently to limit where Amazon EC2 instance credentials can be used from). However, simply having the policy limit access to Amazon Simple Storage Service (Amazon S3) meant that the threat actor decided to leave with just the one Amazon ECS task running crypto mining rather than a larger number of Amazon EC2 instances.

Customer communication and result

After reporting these findings to the customer, there were two clear next steps: First, remove the now unwanted and untrusted Amazon ECS resource from their AWS account. Second, review and re-architect the Amazon ECS task so that access to the web interface was only provided to appropriate users. As part of that re-architecting, an Amazon S3 policy similar to “Allows read and write access to objects in an S3 bucket” was recommended. This separates Amazon S3 bucket actions from Amazon S3 object actions. When applications have a need to read and write objects in Amazon S3, they don’t normally have a need to create or delete entire buckets (or versioning on those buckets).

Some tools to help

We’ve just looked at how limiting privileges helped during two different security events. Now, let’s consider what can help you decide how to reduce your IAM permissions to an appropriate level. There are a number of resources that talk about different approaches:

The first approach is to use Access Analyzer to help generate IAM policies based on access activity from log data. This can then be refined further with the addition of Condition elements as desired. We already have a couple of blog posts about that exact topic:

The second approach is similar, and that is to reduce policy scope based on the last-accessed information:

The third approach is a manual method of creating and refining policies to reduce the amount of work required. For this, you can begin with an appropriate AWS managed IAM policy or an AWS provided example policy as a starting point. Following this, you can add or remove Actions, Resources, and Conditions — using wildcards as desired — to balance your effort and permission reduction.

An example of balancing effort and permission is in the IAM tutorial Create and attach your first customer managed policy. In it, the authors create a policy that uses iam:Get* and iam:List:* in the Actions section. Although not all iam:Get* and iam:List:* Actions may be required, this is a good way to group similar Actions together while minimizing Actions that allow unwanted access — for example, iam:Create* or iam:Delete*. Another example of this balancing was mentioned earlier relating to Amazon S3, allowing access to create, delete, and read objects, but not to change the configuration of the bucket those objects are in.

In addition to limiting permissions, we also recommend that you set up appropriate detection and response capability. This will enable you to know when an issue has occurred and provide the tools to contain and recover from the issue. Further details about performing incident response in an AWS account can be found in the AWS Security Incident Response Guide.

There are also two services that were used to help in the stories we presented here — Amazon GuardDuty and AWS CloudTrail. GuardDuty is a threat detection service that continuously monitors your AWS accounts and workloads for malicious activity. It’s a great way to monitor for unwanted activity within your AWS accounts. CloudTrail records account activity across your AWS infrastructure and provides the logs that were used for the analysis that AWS CIRT performed for both these stories. Making sure that both of these are set up correctly is a great first step towards improving your threat detection and incident response capability in AWS.

Conclusion

In this post, we looked at two examples where limiting privilege provided positive results during a security event. In the second case, the policy used should probably have restricted permissions further, but even as it stood, it was an effective preventative control in stopping the unauthorized user from achieving their assumed goal.

Hopefully these stories will provide new insight into the way your organization thinks about setting permissions, while taking into account the effort of creating the permissions. These stories are a good example of how starting a journey towards least privilege can help stop unauthorized users. Neither of the scenarios had policies that were least privilege, but the policies were restrictive enough that the unauthorized users were prevented from achieving their goals this time, resulting in minimal impact to the customers. However in both cases AWS CIRT recommended further reducing the scope of the IAM policies being used.

Finally, we provided a few ways to go about reducing permissions—first, by using tools to assist with policy creation, and second, by editing existing policies so they better fit your specific needs. You can get started by checking your existing policies against what Access Analyzer would recommend, by looking for and removing overly permissive wildcard characters (*) in some of your existing IAM policies, or by implementing and refining your SCPs.

 
If you have feedback about this post, submit comments in the Comments section below. If you have questions about this post, contact AWS Support.

Want more AWS Security news? Follow us on Twitter.

Richard Billington

Richard Billington

Richard is the Incident Response Watch Lead for the Asia-Pacific region of the AWS Customer Incident Response Team (a team that supports AWS Customers during active security events). He also helps customers prepare for security events using event simulations. Outside of work, he loves wildlife photography and Dr Pepper (which is hard to find in meaningful quantities within Australia).

161 AWS services achieve HITRUST certification

Post Syndicated from Mark Weech original https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/security/161-aws-services-achieve-hitrust-certification/

The Amazon Web Services (AWS) HITRUST Compliance Team is excited to announce that 161 AWS services have been certified for the HITRUST CSF version 11.0.1 for the 2023 cycle. The full list of AWS services, which were audited by a third-party assessor and certified under the HITRUST CSF, is now available on our Services in Scope by Compliance Program page. You can view and download our HITRUST CSF certification at any time on demand through AWS Artifact.

The HITRUST CSF has been widely adopted by leading organizations in a variety of industries in their approach to security and privacy. Visit the HITRUST website for more information. HITRUST certification allows you, as an AWS customer, to tailor your security control baselines specific to your architecture and assessment scope, and inherit certification for those controls so they don’t have to be tested as a component of your HITRUST assessment. Because cloud-based controls don’t have to be retested, AWS customers enjoy savings in both time and cost for their own HITRUST assessment certification needs.

AWS HITRUST CSF certification is available for customer inheritance with an updated Shared Responsibility Matrix version 1.4.1

As an added benefit to our customers, organizations no longer have to assess inherited controls for their HITRUST validated assessment, because AWS already has! Our customers can deploy business solutions into the AWS cloud environment and inherit our HITRUST CSF certification for those controls applicable to their cloud architecture for services that are in-scope of the AWS HITRUST assessment. A detailed listing of controls and corresponding inheritance values can be found on the HITRUST website.

The AWS HITRUST Inheritance Program supports the latest version of HITRUST controls (v11.1), and is excited to announce the availability of the latest Shared Responsibility Matrix (SRM) version 1.4.1. As an added benefit, the AWS HITRUST Inheritance Program also supports the control inheritance of AWS cloud-based workloads for new HITRUST e1 and i1 assessment types, as well as the validated r2-type assessments offered through HITRUST. The SRM is also backward-compatible to earlier versions of the HITRUST CSF from v9.1 through v11.

Additionally, through the AWS HITRUST Inheritance Program, AWS is a member of the Health 3rd Party Trust Initiative (Health3PT), a consortium of the largest US-based healthcare systems that is proactively committed to reducing third-party information security risk with more reliable and efficient assurances. You can find additional information at https://health3pt.org.

As always, we value your feedback and questions and are committed to helping you achieve and maintain the highest standard of security and compliance. Feel free to contact the team through AWS Compliance Contact Us.

Want more AWS Security how-to content, news, and feature announcements? Follow us on Twitter.

Mark Weech

Mark Weech

Mark is the AWS HITRUST Compliance Program Manager and has over 30 years of experience in compliance and cybersecurity roles pertaining to the healthcare, finance, and national defense industries. Mark holds several cybersecurity certifications and is a member of InfraGard’s Cyber Health Working Group—a partnership between the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and members of the private sector for the protection of US critical infrastructure (healthcare section).