-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 454
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
[Modules] Microsoft.Storage/StorageAccounts and Microsoft.KeyVault/vaults policy exemption #2997
Draft
shawntmeyer
wants to merge
10
commits into
Azure:main
Choose a base branch
from
shawntmeyer:StorageAccount-PolicyExemption
base: main
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
Draft
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
10 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
294b011
initial commit for publish
5ee8a78
updated readme
dcf3b95
updated readme
87ab9d3
updated policyAssignmentName
7291d51
changed assignment name
581471d
added userassignedid to test
dae567d
added location to resource
6180988
updated false condition on metadata
fe3cddd
added Keyvault
7b88fa4
changed policy assignments to incorporate deny
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Wouldn't the storage account deployment be already blocked before we even make it to the excemption?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
it is not, the storage account is deployed. The common tests for both storage accounts and key vaults deploy a policy assignment that denies the creation of a resource that doesn't meet the policy. I verified that the test is a true test in that the resource doesn't meet the policy, but the exception works and the deployment succeeds.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Is the policy a deny or an audit policy?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@eriqua, it is a Deny policy (https://portal.azure.com/#blade/Microsoft_Azure_Policy/PolicyDetailBlade/definitionId/%2Fproviders%2FMicrosoft.Authorization%2FpolicyDefinitions%2Fc9d007d0-c057-4772-b18c-01e546713bcd) and in the test deployed with the Deny effect. Same for Key Vault.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Interesting. I'm inclined to see this as an unexpected behaviour of the policy. Probably due to timing? I'm very confused as I'd expect the deny policy to deny the creation of an uncompliant resource, by definition 🤔
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This is exactly why I needed the PR. We can not create Resource Level exemptions without the resource ID and we can't create the resource with a deny policy in place without the exemption. The only way to do this is through ARM as a single deployment. ARM sorts it out and allows the resource to be created due to the exemption. Without this we would have to temporarily place an exemption at the RG level or disable the policy.