Closed karpok78 closed 11 hours ago
Thanks for reporting this, we're promoting the next release of FAST soon, I'll make sure this is fixed there.
Thanks for opening this issue. and the detailed error messages.
Let's start from the naming inconsistency: the new release of FAST which is out as an rc and we'll promote this week already addresses it. This is a snippet from the generated workflow file for the project factory:
FAST_SERVICE_ACCOUNT: ldj-prod-resman-pf-1@ldj-prod-iac-core-0.iam.gserviceaccount.com
FAST_SERVICE_ACCOUNT_PLAN: ldj-prod-resman-pf-1r@ldj-prod-iac-core-0.iam.gserviceaccount.com
Now to the missing IAM bindings for the project factory read-only SA.
One error which I found and you did not report regards missing permissions to read IAM bindings in networking and security stage projects. This is needed when the pf grants roles on other stage 2 resources (e.g. roles/compute.networkUser
). This is addressed in #2683 by granting the custom role projectIAMViewer
to the read-only SA on networking and security folders.
The billing budget error is a lot trickier: for one, we did not have a suitable custom role so a new billingViewer
role was added to stage 0 in #2685. But then this role can only be applied if the billing account is under the same org, so the PR only grants it when var.billing_account.is_org_level
is true. If you are dealing with a service account living outside the org itself, this needs to be done by manually assigning roles/billing.costsManager
which also grants r/w permissions on budgets.
For the buckets, the pattern we support is to have the pf itself create a project to host IaC resources for application-level projects, and there it's its own responsibility to assign the correct permissions to its service account.
I hope this addresses your issues, I am marking this closed but feel free to reopen if you want to further discuss the topic.
Running stage-2 project-factory from a CICD workflow failed at initial "terraform plan" step because of missing IAM permission for xxx-resman-pf-0r service account.
I could not check all stage features, but I could identify at least:
As a side note, there is also a little inconsistency in WIF SA names: xxx-pf-resman-pf-1, but xxx-resman-pf-1r