-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.2k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
feat: account id endpoint support #2976
Merged
stobrien89
merged 14 commits into
aws:master
from
yenfryherrerafeliz:feat_account_id_endpoint_support
Aug 5, 2024
Merged
feat: account id endpoint support #2976
stobrien89
merged 14 commits into
aws:master
from
yenfryherrerafeliz:feat_account_id_endpoint_support
Aug 5, 2024
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This change add account_id as part of the identity resolution, from the different credentials provider. It also validates whether an account should have been resolved based on the configure option account_id_endpoint_mode. The way this is done is by using lazy resolvers. We wrap the credentials provider into a custom lazy resolver that will avoid resolving credentials more than once, which means that in that credentials lazy resolver the value will be resolved once, and it will be returned everytime the credentials provider is consumed/invoked. For accountId builts-in, we also use a lazy resolver which holds the validation for wheter account_id value should have been resolved as part of the resolved identity. This accountId built-ins lazy resolver is resolved from endpoint resolution.
For resolving credentials just once per request, and no just once per client initialization, we are adding a middleware that will call forceRefresh method from the CredentialsLazyResolver implementation, and since this middleware will be executed in every request then, the credentials will be fresh per request. We are also fixing here how account_id_endpoint_mode configuration is being resolved.
In this change we add AccountId resolution for when AccountId is part of the rulesetParameters and accountIdEndpointMode is not disabled, in EndpointV2Middleware. If AccountId should be resolved then, we will resolve the credentialsProvider, which will resolve an identity from which we will extract the accountId, and if an accountId is not present in that resolved identity then, we will log a warning if accountIdEndpointMode is set to preferred or throw an exception if accountIdEndpointMode is required. Another part of this change is, that if we get up to the point of resolving the credentials provider then, we inject the resolved identity into $command['@context'] as the property 'resolved_identity'. We do this for trying to avoid having to resolve credentials more than once per request.
Addresses feedback for conditionally calling the method resolvingAccountId based on if the parameter is present in the rulesset of the endpoint provider. Include tests coverage for AssumeRoleCredentialProvider, AssumeRoleWithWebIdentityCredentialProvider, process, shared files, and credentials from environment.
The validation of whether account_id should be resolved or not is going to be done by the ruleset, and therefore the validation logic around this needs to be removed.
- Move test cases into a valid existent class. In this case the tests in SourceAccountIdEndpointTest were moved to StsClient class. - Create test for InstanceProfileProvider - Create test for EcsCredentialProvider
Remove null coalescing operator from the CredentialProvider class in order to prevent Docs Build to fail.
Make endpoint test cases compatible with account_id endpoint mode.
Resolved merge conflicts when merging master into feat_account_id_endpoint_support branch.
yenfryherrerafeliz
force-pushed
the
feat_account_id_endpoint_support
branch
from
August 5, 2024 17:42
be88327
to
7b36aaf
Compare
Update test account values to be in compliant with our git-secrets checks. We can use either dummy values, such as `foo`, or the fixed values `123456789012` or `999999999999`.
yenfryherrerafeliz
force-pushed
the
feat_account_id_endpoint_support
branch
from
August 5, 2024 18:28
7b36aaf
to
30ab4e1
Compare
stobrien89
approved these changes
Aug 5, 2024
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Issue #, if available:
Description of changes:
By submitting this pull request, I confirm that you can use, modify, copy, and redistribute this contribution, under the terms of your choice.