The dbt-native data observability solution for data & analytics engineers. Monitor your data pipelines in minutes. Available as self-hosted or cloud service with premium features.
This pull request has been added to update the client to use bucket method instead of the get_bucket method.
If the get_bucket method is used the account that makes the request must have storage.buckets.get access on the project itself which means that the account must have two roles applied to it in order for the IAM to work. This also means that the account must have more access than it technically needs to the project.
This was spotted when building and pushing elementary files through a CI pipeline. The get_bucket method can be used to check a bucket exists but as this is not something that is done within the elementary code, it doesn't make sense to use it. It should be on the user to make sure the bucket is available.
Switching to this method the account will only need storage.objectAdmin role on the bucket to write the files. Rather than having to use storage.objectAdmin and another role that has the storage.bucket.get permission.
I have not raised a bug for this as it is a one line change but happy to if required
This pull request has been added to update the client to use
bucket
method instead of theget_bucket
method.If the
get_bucket
method is used the account that makes the request must havestorage.buckets.get
access on the project itself which means that the account must have two roles applied to it in order for the IAM to work. This also means that the account must have more access than it technically needs to the project.This stack overflow post outlines the issue
This was spotted when building and pushing elementary files through a CI pipeline. The
get_bucket
method can be used to check a bucket exists but as this is not something that is done within the elementary code, it doesn't make sense to use it. It should be on the user to make sure the bucket is available.More details on this here
Switching to this method the account will only need
storage.objectAdmin
role on the bucket to write the files. Rather than having to usestorage.objectAdmin
and another role that has thestorage.bucket.get
permission.I have not raised a bug for this as it is a one line change but happy to if required