Here and welcome back now into this, we will be discussing about a very important topic, specifically
from the perspective of cross contest through market access, and the name of today's topic is Can Seen.
No.
One very important part to remember in Italy's history is that every market and its objects have an
escalator associated with them.
So when a request is received, a double and triple check against the attached ACL to either allow or
block access to a specified object.
So let's assume you have a candidate to account with or takes.
These are the two different objects in a common history bucket.
So both of these objects might have same set of permissions, might have different set of permissions
depending upon the scenario and based on the permissions or based on the heels associated with them,
the access can be granted or can be rejected.
Now, the tricky part here is that when you have a centralised three bucket where the locks from hundreds
of accounts are coming, whenever the object is uploaded in this bucket, each object will have its
own different ECL altogether.
So currently you see the Account 846 to this specific file on the left has the seal of owner account
it.
And the second file, which is the account hyphen DOT has the ACL of owner of Account B, so both of
them, although they are part of the same as three bucket, has a different set of ECL altogether.
Now this is very similar to the scenario where we were discussing where we have a centralised three
bucket and when we were trying to download a template for DataDot, we were able to download it successfully.
But the second find a common payphone B dot B we were not able to download it because it is associated
with a different ECL.
In fact, if you wanted to look into it, you can explore it.
So if you open the file and if you look into the permission, you're able to see that for this you had
read and the object itself read and write.
So this is working perfectly well.
However, if you try to read a series of the account B dot, you should get permission denied.
Stating that you don't have permission to get the object is here, even though I'm logged in as an administrative
user.
So in most of the architecture where you have Corozal contest three, what would generally happen is
that third party solutions like log monitoring or S.A.M., they would typically connect to the central
S3 bucket and from your they'll fetch the logs of all of the other accounts that are sending the logs
to the same place.
Now, if each account that is uploading the log to the same Balestra bucket, the object of those accounts
has a different AC altogether.
Then the third party solution that is trying to fetch the logs or even the IBM administrator of this
central S3 bucket which is associated with the account, it will not be able to fetch the objects all
together.
So this type of having a different ECL is not the best of the approaches.
You're not to better understand it.
Let's do one thing.
Let me go ahead and create a new user.
I just called the users, account it and let's switch to the user account.
And within a year I'll quickly do it configured and let me go ahead and copy paste access security associated
with the central account, which is nothing but the account.
So that region and escalator's us these two one group.
Now if you want to look into the Isiah's, you can quickly do it as three API data object is the bucket
is my kapiloff central and you'll also have to specify the object.
The object is then paid for in data and yet you basically see you're getting a permission of full control
if you run the same command on the account and dirty.
So this was a file that was uploaded from A going B, you see, you immediately get access denied,
something very similar to what we have seen in the joy.
Alright, so in order to solve this issue, we need to understand the concept of candy seen.
So the Idalis history supports a set of predefined grounds for reference condition and each candidate
has a predefined set of permission associated with them.
So at a high level or we just understand there are multiple acts like private public read bucket Hornery
and a bucket or not full control.
So let's look into the description of Boca Raton, Florida, and the bucket on the full control.
So for the bucket on the state's owner of the object has full control, bucket owner will need permission.
And for the bucket under full control, it states what the object or and the bucket honor gets full
control over the object.
Now, if you look here, the permission is full control.
However, the permission of full control is only associated with the temp.
DataDot in a similar way, the permission of full control for the account and b the text will be associated
with the ambiguity of the accountably.
So let's also try it out.
So let's do one thing.
Let's logout with controlled and we'll switch to the account accountably.
So I we are going to be access secret.
These are configured.
So when you do it doubles as three epper.
The object is here, the bucket is McAvey large central and the key is account Bedau.
Now at this stage you are getting access denied primarily because this specific permission is not associated
within both the bucket policy as well as the AM policy.
So let's quickly add it so forth in that account to be where we have the policy associated with the
user.
Let's go ahead and edit this policy and within the action will allow one more action year, which is
the gate object once.
Then let's go ahead and review and see if the change in a similar way.
Let's also change the bucket policy here.
Let's edit it.
In fact, let me zoom in and let's say three gate object.
Easiest one, then you can see the change.
Let's zoom out back again.
Perfect.
So now when you go ahead and run the same command, you see, you are able to successfully run it.
So for this specific object name are going to be dirty.
You have a full control.
And who has a full control?
The owner with this and Brumidi Labs and Romita Labs is nothing, but they are going to be.
So this is very similar to the diagram where one of the five has a full control ACL from a county and
second file has a full control ACL from are going to be.
And this is the reason why a neat Iame user of the account with the central history is present will
not be able to query this specific file.
So what we need to do, we need to go ahead and change the permission to that of the bucket or full
control.
And what does the bucket on full control state what the object honor and the bucket owner gets full
control over the object.
So now let's do one thing.
Let's create a new file, let's call it as a candidate.
And now when you go ahead and upload this specific file, let's apply it to Mike Epilepsia Bensington
during the time of upload, you can also set this specific ACL so you can see ACL -- or not full
control ilet.
Let's upload it.
Perfect.
And now if you do a dabblers is three pion get object ACL and if you'll run not on can you see under
the grains this time you have two grains that are available.
One is for the account B and second is for the account.
So now both of these accounts has full ownership on this specific candidate.
Be defined.
Great.
So let's refresh the page.
You have the candidate text.
If you look into the permissions of this, you should be able to look into the permissions.
So you see, you have to guarantee one is the object or not, which is the external account.
That is they are going to be and taken.
Is the bucket or not.
That is your current account.
Great.
So I hope with this you understood the importance of can easily across account as three access and how
when setting up the Radislav bucket on a full control is the appropriate way.
Or I would say one of the appropriate ways on storing the data in a centralized S3 bucket so that this
will conclude today's video.