Amazon S3 Path Deprecation Plan – The Rest of the Story
aws.amazon.com
Amazon S3 Path Deprecation Plan – The Rest of the Story
1–10 of 146 posts
Re: Amazon S3 Path Deprecation Plan – The Rest of the Story
#2Thank you for listening! The original plan was insane. The new one is sane. As I pointed out here https://twitter.com/dvassallo/status/1125549694778691584 thousands of printed books had references to V1 S3 URLs. Breaking them would have been a huge loss. Thank you!
Re: Amazon S3 Path Deprecation Plan – The Rest of the Story
#3It's nice to see that instead of deprecation support for the old paths will continue for all buckets created on or before the cut-off date of Sept 30, 2020.
So if you don't want to change, you can continue using the old paths. Just might limit access to some new features coming later that are dependent on the virtual host sub domains.
Re: Amazon S3 Path Deprecation Plan – The Rest of the Story
#4Grandfathering is a good idea. GJ AWS.
Re: Amazon S3 Path Deprecation Plan – The Rest of the Story
#5[deleted]
Re: Amazon S3 Path Deprecation Plan – The Rest of the Story
#6> Bucket Names with Dots – It is important to note that bucket names with “.” characters are perfectly valid for website hosting and other use cases. However, there are some known issues with TLS and with SSL certificates. We are hard at work on a plan to support virtual-host requests to these buckets, and will share the details well ahead of September 30, 2020.
I’m mystified how they’re planning on doing this. Anybody care to speculate?
Re: Amazon S3 Path Deprecation Plan – The Rest of the Story
#7> Bucket Names with Dots – It is important to note that bucket names with “.” characters are perfectly valid for website hosting and other use cases. However, there are some known issues with TLS and with SSL certificates. We are hard at work on a plan to support virtual-host requests to these buckets, and will share the details well ahead of September 30, 2020. I’m mystified how they’re planning on doing this. Anybo…
They're already a CA, could they reasonably just issue a certificate for every bucket? I have no idea how many buckets there are in total.
~They probably couldn't take the Cloudflare approach of jamming 100 customer domains onto each certificate, since that would leak bucket names too easily.~
Re: Amazon S3 Path Deprecation Plan – The Rest of the Story
#8> Bucket Names with Dots – It is important to note that bucket names with “.” characters are perfectly valid for website hosting and other use cases. However, there are some known issues with TLS and with SSL certificates. We are hard at work on a plan to support virtual-host requests to these buckets, and will share the details well ahead of September 30, 2020. I’m mystified how they’re planning on doing this. Anybo…
They're already a CA, could they reasonably just issue a certificate for every bucket? I have no idea how many buckets there are in total. ~They probably couldn't take the Cloudflare approach of jamming 100 customer domains onto each certificate, since that would leak bucket names too easily.~
Isn't it technically valid to issue a cert with (star).domain.com, (star).(star).domain.com, (star).(star).(star).domain.com, etc...?
Re: Amazon S3 Path Deprecation Plan – The Rest of the Story
#9> Bucket Names with Dots – It is important to note that bucket names with “.” characters are perfectly valid for website hosting and other use cases. However, there are some known issues with TLS and with SSL certificates. We are hard at work on a plan to support virtual-host requests to these buckets, and will share the details well ahead of September 30, 2020. I’m mystified how they’re planning on doing this. Anybo…
They're already a CA, could they reasonably just issue a certificate for every bucket? I have no idea how many buckets there are in total. ~They probably couldn't take the Cloudflare approach of jamming 100 customer domains onto each certificate, since that would leak bucket names too easily.~
They could probably even generate them in a lazy-loading style
Re: Amazon S3 Path Deprecation Plan – The Rest of the Story
#10> Bucket Names with Dots – It is important to note that bucket names with “.” characters are perfectly valid for website hosting and other use cases. However, there are some known issues with TLS and with SSL certificates. We are hard at work on a plan to support virtual-host requests to these buckets, and will share the details well ahead of September 30, 2020. I’m mystified how they’re planning on doing this. Anybo…
They're already a CA, could they reasonably just issue a certificate for every bucket? I have no idea how many buckets there are in total. ~They probably couldn't take the Cloudflare approach of jamming 100 customer domains onto each certificate, since that would leak bucket names too easily.~
> They probably couldn't take the Cloudflare approach of jamming 100 customer domains onto each certificate, since that would leak bucket names too easily.
Issuing one certificate at a time wouldn't make a difference since they're all submitted to public CT logs. Bucket names shouldn't contain sensitive information and security through obscurity is a bad idea.