I wish to grant users in a given AD group access to the Development Tools > Console function of the Production environment. I believe this is Kudu permission granted by assigning the Microsoft.Web/sites/publish/Action.
Is this possible without granting a member of the group the ability to publish web sites?
It is not possible to granting a member of the group the ability to publish web sites.
From the microsoft document it stated clear that you required microsoft.web/sites/publish/action resource provider operation.
Ones with Kudu access are ones owning the site - regardless if
read-only or not. To expand, they can deploy any codes (good or
malicious) to and able to read any secret settings of the site (eg.
KeyVault, SQL and Storage credentials, Private Certificates, etc.).
Hence for Azure, only those with Contributor / Owner access (to be
exact, with microsoft.web/sites/publish/action or, for slot,
microsoft.web/sites/slots/publish/action) can access to Kudu (SCM).
Refer this document for more information.
Related
We've been told by Microsoft support that Azure DevOps Services supports tenant restrictions. While we have tenant restrictions enabled on a number of other services, it does't seem to apply to DevOps. Not only can we still log in to organizations outside of our tenant, we can also log in to our own organization and, if our corp email is added as a user in that org, the organization also shows up. I'd expect that our users would be blocked from logging into or accessing any external orgs.
I'm a little confused about why this isn't just working as expected and despite them saying Azure DevOps Services supports tenant restrictions, I'm not finding much documentation to back that up.
Have you been able to migrate to Azure DevOps Services and ensure that your users are only able to access orgs within your own tenant? How?
Azure DevOps Service supports the Azure Active Directory (Azure AD) tenant policy to restrict users from creating an organization in Azure DevOps. This policy is turned off, by default. You must be an Azure DevOps Administrator in Azure AD to manage this policy.
Check following link for more details:
https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/devops/organizations/accounts/azure-ad-tenant-policy-restrict-org-creation?view=azure-devops
Notice:
This policy is supported only for company owned (Azure Active
Directory) organizations. Users creating organization using their
personal account (MSA or GitHub) have no restrictions.
https://devblogs.microsoft.com/devops/policy-support-to-restrict-creating-new-azure-devops-organizations/
We finally received a more concrete answer to this question from Premier Support. Sounds like this wasn't entirely clear internally either. Azure DevOps Services supports TRv1 which provides tenant restrictions from client to proxy, but does not support TRv2 tenant restrictions which provides server to server restrictions. TRv1 will prevent you from authenticating against an org outside your tenant directly but does nothing to prevent the background authentication that happens if your account is configured to be able to access a secondary tenant's org. The server to server connection strips off the header information necessary to restrict you from accessing the secondary tenant. While this feature may be on their radar there is no expectation or firm timeline for it's release at this time.
I am trying to make request to the Graph API using a service with no UI. I downloaded the following sample code and followed the instructions: https://blog.kloud.com.au/2015/12/14/implementing-application-with-o365-graph-api-in-app-only-mode/
I successfully get an Access Token, but when using it to make a request to get organization information (required Read Directory Data access), I get 403 Unauthorized.
I have registered my app in Azure AD (where I am a co-administrator).
I have specified Microsoft Graph in the 'permissions to other applications' section, and given Read Directory Data access.
Interestingly there is a note below saying 'You are authorized to select only delegated permissions which have personal scope'. Even though I clearly did. Why? I suspect this is the source of my problem.
Likewise I have checked my demo app against these instructions: https://graph.microsoft.io/en-us/docs/authorization/app_only, but it makes no mention of what role in Azure you need to have.
in this SO post's answer, there is mention of still needing to Consent. I haven't found any documentation about this.
You are authorized to select only delegated permissions which have personal scope
This issue is caused that the app is created by none admin and when they visit the portal then will see this message.
To grant the app-only permission to the application, we need to be the administrator of the tenant. It is different with the co-administrator. To user the Client Credential flow, I suggest that you contact the admin of the tenant to create an application for you. And if you were just for testing purpose, you can create a free tenant and register the application yourself.
Update
We need the assign the Global administrator director role as figure below to make the application works for the client credential flow:
I want to get details of Azure Subscription of my client. But I do not want to ask for special permission from client.
What I need is the bare minimum things from my client so that I can login from powershell or rest api and read status of runbook jobs.
If i login from admin account of the subscription than I can easily get those details. But you understand it is not possible to have admin account credential of my client.
Please suggest some workaround.
What you need to do is create a user in Azure Active Directory and grant that user specific rights using either the Azure Portal or PowerShell\Cli\SDK.
Say read all, or read properties of desired automation account. If you would want like a super minumim, you would need to create a custom role first.
https://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/documentation/articles/role-based-access-control-custom-roles/
If your client placed specific resources within a Resource Group, they may grant you permissions on just that Resource Group (including read-only permissions). This would allow you to have access to needed resources, without having access to other areas of their subscription.
I created a KeyVault in my Azure subscription and a client application in one of my Azure AD directories. However, the client application is not registered in the default directory of the subscription.
When I run the following PowerShell cmdlet, it tries to look up the service principal in the default directory of the subscription and fails to find it.
PS > Set-AzureKeyVaultAccessPolicy -VaultName <vaultname>
-ServicePrincipalName <principal guid> -PermissionsToSecrets Get
I found an article describing how to change the default directory for a subscription in the management portal, but was wondering how to do the same using PowerShell.
The 'Select-AzureSubscription' cmdlet does not seem to support changing the default directory.
Nor does the 'Set-AzureKeyVaultAccessPolicy' support a parameter to indicate in which directory it should look.
Key Vault can only authorize applications (clients) registered in the directory associated with the Azure subscription, and the only way (currently) to change the 'home' directory associated with a subscription is through the Azure management portal.
I would imagine this is as designed behaviour, and can't imagine how / why it would change.
An Azure subscription has an Azure Active Directory attached to it, this is the directory it will use to authenticate against whenever someone tries to access resources.
While you can create trusts to other Active Directories simply creating an new AAD does not automatically enable that domain to be trusted by Azure.
Key Vault is designed to only be accessible to authenticated users, it is designed to provide secure data to those users. Since there is no authentication mechanism between the multiple directories you have created, there is no mechanism for Key Vault to determine who those directories belong to.
Key Vault needs to resolve a service principle through the Active Directory attached to the subscription it is running under (whether that is directly through that directory, or through another domain that it trusts). Anything else would create additional attack vectors and considerably weaken the product.
I would like to find out what the best practices are for managing developers' access to a sub-set of resources on a client's subscription?
I've searched Google and the Azure documentation looking for definitive answers, but I have yet to come across an article that puts it all together. Because Azure is still developing so rapidly I often find it difficult to determine whether a particular article may still be relevant.
To sum up our situation:
I've been tasked with researching and implementing the Azure infrastructure for a web site our company is developing for a client. At the moment our manager and I have access to the client's entire subscription on the Azure Portal by means of the Service Administrator's credentials, even though we're managing only:
Azure Cloud Service running a Web-Role (2-instances with Production and Staging environments).
Azure SQL Database.
Azure Blob Storage for deployments, diagnostics etc.
We're now moving into a phase where more of the developers in the team will require access to perform maintenance type tasks such as performing a VIP swap, retrieving diagnostic info etc.
What is the proper way to manage developer's access on such a project?
The approach I've taken was to implement Role Based Access Control (https://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/documentation/articles/role-based-access-control-configure/)
Move 1, 2, and 3 above into a new Resource Group according to http://blog.kloud.com.au/2015/03/24/moving-resources-between-azure-resource-groups/
Creating a new User Group for our company, say "GroupXYZ".
Adding the "GroupXYZ" to the Contributor role.
Adding the particular developer's company accounts to "GroupXYZ"
Motivation for taking the role-based approach
From what I understand giving everyone access as a Co-Administrator would mean that they have full access to every subscription in the portal.
Account-based authentication is preferable to certificate-based authentication due to the complexity added by managing the certificates.
What caused me to question my approach was the fact that I could not perform a VIP swap against the Cloud Service using PowerShell; I received an error message stating that a certificate could not be found.
Do such role-based accounts only have access to Azure by means of the Resource Manager Commandlets?
I had to switch PowerShell to the Azure Service Manager (ASM) Mode before having access to the Move-AzureDeployment commandlet.
Something else I'm not sure of is whether or not Visual Studio will have access to those resources (in the Resource Group) when using Role Based Access Control.
When you apply RBAC to Azure as you have or just in general, give access to an account via RBAC, then those accounts can only access Azure via the Azure Resource Manager APIs, whether that's PowerShell, REST or VS.
VS 2015 can access Azure resources via RBAC when using the 2.7 SDK. VS 2013 will have support for it soon.