prowler
prowler copied to clipboard
Add a new s3 check to verify if objects inside the bucket are public
New feature motivation
The s3_bucket_public_access checks for public access at the bucket level, but objects inside of it might be public
Solution Proposed
Its not feasible to check every object in the bucket. My proposal is to use a function that will select a user-defined (via config options) number of random objects in the bucket, and check if they are public. What I am seeing on my current assessment is that there are buckets that arnt public, but every object in the buckets are public, so this check would catch this type of misconfig.
Risk is mitigated (when compared to a full-blown public bucket) as you cant simply list the objects in the bucket, as the bucket is not publicly accessible.
Here is some pseduo-code that could be modified and used
import boto3
import random
def list_and_randomly_select_s3_objects(bucket_name, number_of_objects=3):
# Initialize a boto3 client
s3 = boto3.client('s3')
# Retrieve the list of objects in the bucket
try:
response = s3.list_objects_v2(Bucket=bucket_name)
objects = response.get('Contents', [])
# Check if the bucket is empty
if not objects:
print("The bucket is empty.")
return []
# Extract object keys
object_keys = [obj['Key'] for obj in objects]
# Randomly select the user-defined number of objects, default is 3
selected_keys = random.sample(object_keys, min(len(object_keys), number_of_objects))
print(f"Randomly selected object keys: {selected_keys}")
return selected_keys
except Exception as e:
print(f"An error occurred: {e}")
return []
# Example usage
bucket_name = 'your-bucket-name'
selected_objects = list_and_randomly_select_s3_objects(bucket_name, 3) # You can change 3 to any number you prefer
Describe alternatives you've considered
None
Additional context
No response
I imagine that the "list_and_randomly_select_s3_objects" method would be implemented on the s3_client, and then used in the check
@jfagoagas I am interested work on this issue. Can you please assign it to me?
Hello @ChaitanyaYeole02, for sure that you can work on this. I think first we'd need to:
- Analyze what is happening.
- Get a list of affected checks if any
- Get a list of possible new checks if any
- See how can make a general solution, i.e.: having a common function to check that.
What do you think? If we do this analysis first we can get to a better and quicker solution. It'd be great if this analysis is first shared and discussed within this issue since it could help / attract other users and also provide more visibility about the current status.
Hey @jfagoagas @ChaitanyaYeole02 is this something I can work on, if you haven't already started working on it.
Thanks!
Hello @abant07 , I am working on this issue already.