remove redundant read access from s3 user policies #95
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
The bucket ACL already grants this permission via AuthenticatedUsers, no need to repeat it a bunch
|
Indeed. It is much simpler! Thank you. |
annefou
approved these changes
Oct 23, 2024
|
In general, the Bucket ACLs and user policies are almost redundant. We shouldn't need both, but I need to do some testing to figure out if we can safely replace them. Ideally, Object Acls would be disabled (the AWS default and recommended behavior), but OVH doesn't seem to allow that. |
|
I think I have a way to simplify this further and also test it, PR momentarily |
|
Wow! That would be fantastic! Thank you! |
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
The bucket ACL already grants this permission via AuthenticatedUsers, no need to repeat it a bunch of redundant permissions
@annefou this will affect what you need to write for a new bucket, since less is required