|
|
|
|
|
by amluto
32 days ago
|
|
> but fundamentally it is "what does this role have access to doing (action + resource)" + "who has access to this role". That is really it from a 10k foot level. Hahahaha. No, fundamentally it is one input into a huge mess that you cannot actually see or audit from a 10k foot level. AWS has produced a long, rambling and imprecise description of (some of?) what’s actually going on. You can read it here: https://docs.aws.amazon.com/IAM/latest/UserGuide/access_poli... Some of what they’re describing doesn’t even live within the IAM umbrella as far as I can tell. I’m not convinced that a concise, formal and unambiguous specification exists anywhere, even within AWSes own development teams. I’ve asked LLMs to write AWS “policy”. They get the grammar mostly right. They cannot explain what the effects are in a manner that they will stand by after they search the web for documentation. Since I have never found good documentation despite looking, I can’t personally do any better than the LLMs. I’d love to be pointed at real documentation or specs. |
|
I don't work for IAM but I worked for several other teams over the years and IAM is actually one of the least confusing services. But I am definitely biased and have more than average amount of experience on this particular subject. I still think the general idea is more sane than Azure Account for example. I do think this reflect on the philosophical level where whether cloud are building blocks or are they consulting projects. I personally think IAM is done right in that regard.