I have setup two teams in pagerduty (that have their own escalation policy and roster). One team owns a service, but the ownership is changing within our organisation and the other team is now to be oncall for the service. I can't find anything in the documentation about how to edit the team that owns a service. How do I do this?
Or do I need to create another service within the second team and re-route all my alerting to that new service?
Team ownership of a service is determined by the team the service's escalation policy is associated with. In this scenario, by changing the service's escalation policy to point to the team that is going to take over the service will cause the service to be tied to that new team.
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.
Is there the possibility to limit the access to Service Fabric Explorer to certain services or specific users?
We have a scenario where we host multiple services on the same cluster. The log information of the Explorer shall be only visible for the 'owner' of each service.
No.
You can use access control to limit access to certain cluster
operations for different groups of users. This helps make the cluster
more secure. Two access control types are supported for clients that
connect to a cluster: Administrator role and User role.
Users who are assigned the Administrator role have full access to
management capabilities, including read and write capabilities. Users
who are assigned the User role, by default, have only read access to
management capabilities (for example, query capabilities). They also
can resolve applications and services.
https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/service-fabric/service-fabric-cluster-security#role-based-access-control-rbac
https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/service-fabric/service-fabric-cluster-security-roles
You can assign different roles to groups, but you cannot scope a role to a service, so basically its all or nothing, you cannot give granular control
I have a project whose resources spanned across 3 resource groups. I want to create a Service connection scoped to all those resource groups so that i can manage access at one place through that service connection. Currently i created 3 service connections scoped to each resource group. I don't want to scope it to subscription since there are other teams handling projects in that subscription. It will give me maintenance and audit issues in the future.
If i create a service principal and assign it to 3 resource groups and then attach this service principal to service connection then would it be good design?
Is there any better way to achieve this ?
When you create a new Service Connection in the Azure DevOps, it will create an Azure AD app registration, and a new service principal will be created for the Resource Group you choose.
So you can just go to any resource group and then add a principal using the Access control (IAM). Select the Add role assignment option and then select the role as a contributor in the role grid, press next. From the next screen, select user, group, or service principal as the option for Assign access to. Click on the + Select members, search for our AD Registered app name, the display name and then select the same from the result, click on the select button. Finally, click the Review + assign button.
I have written a detailed article to explain the steps, you can read that here.
You don't have to create the service principal manually. You can use the interface to create the service principal, grant permissions on the first resource group and configure the connection automatically for you.
Then once it's done, look at the service connection to identify the service principal in use, and give it permissions on the other resource groups.
And yes it is a good design, the only drawback compared to 3 service principals is that you have less granularity over who in Azure DevOps has access to each of these 3 resource groups via permissions on the service service connection(s) (as you only have one and not 3)
We currently have one DevOps repository, with a functional CI/CD pipeline. We have another website hosted on a different instance (and different region) on Azure. We are trying to use our existing repo to deploy to the other Azure instance, but it is giving is the following message:
Failed to query service connection API: 'https://management.azure.com/subscriptions/c50b0601-a951-446c-b637-afa8d6bb1a1d?api-version=2016-06-01'. Status Code: 'Forbidden', Response from server: '{"error":{"code":"AuthorizationFailed","message":"The client '2317de35-b2c2-4e32-a922-e0d076a429f5' with object id '2317de35-b2c2-4e32-a922-e0d076a429f5' does not have authorization to perform action 'Microsoft.Resources/subscriptions/read' over scope '/subscriptions/c50b0601-a951-446c-b637-afa8d6bb1a1d'."}}'
I have tried all of the recommended trouble-shooting, making sure that the user is in a Global Administrator role and what-not, but still not luck. The secondary Azure subscription that we are hoping to push our builds to is a trial account. I'm not sure if it being a trial account matters.
I came across the same error. It turns out that, as the error message states, the service principal didn't have Read permission over the subscription. So the solution was to go to Azure Portal, select the subscription, select IAM and assign the role Reader to my service principal. Full explanation on here:
https://clydedz.medium.com/connecting-azure-devops-with-azure-46a908e3048f
I have the same problem. There are one repository and two instances of the application on the Azure portal. For the first instance, the subscription Pay-As-You-Go is used, and there were no problems for it when creating the service connection and CI/CD settings. For the second instance, a free subscription is used and when trying to create a new service connection (Azure Resource Manager) I get the same error.
I tried to do it with the permissions of Owner and Contributor
UPD: I was helped by the re-creation of the application in the azure portal
https://learn.microsoft.com/en-ca/azure/active-directory/develop/howto-create-service-principal-portal
Another option would be to save without verification if the Service Principle will not require permissions at the Subscription level. Like for example providing access to a Keyvault.
Check if the service connection for the second instance is correctly added in project settings:
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.