aws-codedeploy-agent

nd some beyond that, too). Obligatory reference to the AWS Shared Responsibility Model[0] This is not a bad thing, but it's still a thing. Anyone who migrates to the cloud and magically expects their security posture to improve one iota is simply wrong unless they take active steps to integrate as tightly as they can into that cloud's security tools. As someone who has done a ton of AWS security audits, I can tell you that people take multiple approaches on that: either they don't integrate into it fully, or they submit to vendor lock-in. This is perhaps too deep of an argument, since clearly intelligent and skilled people can reasonably disagree. FWIW, lapsed AWS SA, recovering Fortune 50 cloud security architect, and please don't take my argument about the cloud to indicate that I'm anti-cloud: my security-focused SSH key management company, https://userify.com, is strongly cloud focused: AWS Advanced Tier, GCP Partner, SOC-2, PCI, HIPAA. I'm very much pro-cloud, while recognizing that it enlarges your threat model but brings other security advantages. Where you're hosted doesn't matter as much as whether you're paranoid and clueful, and perhaps have former blackhats on your team ;) So my point is simply that the cloud question isn't that relevant, and the thrust of the other questions should be used to determine security competency instead of where they're running their operations. 0. https://aws.amazon.com/compliance/shared-responsibility-mode...

yet another avenue for mistakes and compromise... was that required, requisite, or optional? Ergo, obsolete. :) (imo) 1. (btw, We don't do server authentication. That is a key difference between a directory and Userify. We only distribute keys. The servers themselves authenticate their own users with Userify just like with the traditional model, whereas with a directory the LDAP/AD server itself performs every authentication.) 2. We also recommend purchasing and running Userify Enterprise locked down locally to your VPC/LAN, and our larger customers tend to prefer that as well (especially when connected to LDAP w/ the same disconnected model we designed into our core product). We also offer a free cloud-based edition for unlimited use because we're nice like that. 3. We're paranoid, just like you: we go through bi-monthly independent penetration tests, we encrypt all data w/ NaCl, we avoid using passwords where possible and has with bcrypt elsewhere, and we're hardened against XSS, CSRF, and any sort of injection. The shim source is available here: https://github.com/userify/shim (see https://userify.com/faq/ for more on the security stuff we do and we're open to more ideas) and, please, find our vulnerabilities. We'll pay you for them. https://support.userify.com/solution/articles/14000036246-fi... Sometimes even our larger partners don't do that unfortunately.. ( https://github.com/aws/aws-codedeploy-agent/issues/30 ) But, seriously, people who are happy with their current solution should probably stick with it. I don't expect to convince you to take another look, and I do agree that there are good arguments to be made that LDAP/AD is neither insecure nor obsolete. I just disagree with (most of) those arguments. ;) note: AD/LDAP connectivity in Userify: you can still authenticate natively via LDAP/AD, while Userify provides a user-friendly dashboard for key management for your teams. A particularly cool demo: remove or disable an account in Windows AD and seconds later watch all of the SSH sessions on all of the servers in all of the projects terminate. It's very slick.. and that's another thing that LDAP/AD directory authenticated solutions can't do.