[WIP] Add policy attribute to aws_api_gateway_rest_api #4211

robwittman · 2018-04-15T17:13:52Z

Fixes #4171.
Adds a policy attribute to the aws_api_gateway_rest_api resource.

The policy attribute is currently being applied, however on every subsequent terraform plan, its requesting to update the attribute in place. I assume this is due to how I am setting the policy in resourceAwsApiGatewayRestApiRead causing one version to be escaped, and one not.

Is there a standard for escaping -> unescaping JSON policies correctly? Sorry if it's obvious, I'm new to Go :)

Failing Test:

--- FAIL: TestAccAWSAPIGatewayRestApi_policy (9.53s)
	testing.go:518: Step 0 error: Check failed: Check 1/1 error: aws_api_gateway_rest_api.test: Attribute 'policy' expected "{\"Version\":\"2012-10-17\",\"Statement\":[{\"Effect\":\"Allow\",\"Principal\":{\"AWS\":\"*\"},\"Action\":\"execute-api:Invoke\",\"Resource\":\"*\"}]}", got "{\\\"Version\\\":\\\"2012-10-17\\\",\\\"Statement\\\":[{\\\"Effect\\\":\\\"Allow\\\",\\\"Principal\\\":{\\\"AWS\\\":\\\"*\\\"},\\\"Action\\\":\\\"execute-api:Invoke\\\",\\\"Resource\\\":\\\"*\\\"}]}"

terraform plan ran after apply.

rwittman$ $GOPATH/bin/terraform plan
Refreshing Terraform state in-memory prior to plan...
The refreshed state will be used to calculate this plan, but will not be
persisted to local or remote state storage.

aws_api_gateway_rest_api.test_gateway: Refreshing state... (ID: hj4o1slwk2)

------------------------------------------------------------------------

An execution plan has been generated and is shown below.
Resource actions are indicated with the following symbols:
  ~ update in-place

Terraform will perform the following actions:

  ~ aws_api_gateway_rest_api.test_gateway
      policy: "{\\\"Version\\\":\\\"2012-10-17\\\",\\\"Statement\\\":[{\\\"Effect\\\":\\\"Allow\\\",\\\"Principal\\\":{\\\"AWS\\\":\\\"arn:aws:iam::717754130149:user\\/dev-encryption-service-emr-user\\\"},\\\"Action\\\":\\\"execute-api:Invoke\\\",\\\"Resource\\\":\\\"arn:aws:execute-api:us-west-2:717754130149:wwo2hqsydh\\/*\\/POST\\/v1\\/encryption-service\\/password\\/change\\\"}]}" => "{\n  \"Version\": \"2012-10-17\",\n  \"Statement\": [\n    {\n      \"Effect\": \"Allow\",\n      \"Principal\": {\n        \"AWS\": \"arn:aws:iam::717754130149:user/dev-encryption-service-emr-user\"\n      },\n      \"Action\": \"execute-api:Invoke\",\n      \"Resource\": \"arn:aws:execute-api:us-west-2:717754130149:wwo2hqsydh/*/POST/v1/encryption-service/password/change\"\n    }\n  ]\n}\n"


Plan: 0 to add, 1 to change, 0 to destroy.

bflad

Thanks for this contribution, @robwittman! Please see my initial comments below. The testing behavior is interesting, I'd see if its related to the wrapping fmt.Sprintf() -- we are able to test this successfully in TestAccAWSIAMUserPolicy_basic for example.

bflad · 2018-04-17T11:41:17Z

aws/resource_aws_api_gateway_rest_api.go

@@ -72,9 +79,15 @@ func resourceAwsApiGatewayRestApiCreate(d *schema.ResourceData, meta interface{}
 		description = aws.String(d.Get("description").(string))
 	}

+	var policy *string


This can be simplified with (after params declaration):

if v, ok := d.GetOk("policy"); ok && v.(string) != "" { params.Policy = aws.String(v.(string)) }

bflad · 2018-04-17T11:42:23Z

aws/resource_aws_api_gateway_rest_api_test.go

@@ -127,6 +127,24 @@ func TestAccAWSAPIGatewayRestApi_basic(t *testing.T) {
 	})
 }

+func TestAccAWSAPIGatewayRestApi_policy(t *testing.T) {
+	expectedPolicyText := fmt.Sprintf(`{"Version":"2012-10-17","Statement":[{"Effect":"Allow","Principal":{"AWS":"*"},"Action":"execute-api:Invoke","Resource":"*"}]}`)


Does this work without the wrapping fmt.Sprintf()?

bflad · 2018-04-17T11:43:20Z

aws/resource_aws_api_gateway_rest_api_test.go

+				Check: resource.ComposeTestCheckFunc(
+					resource.TestCheckResourceAttr("aws_api_gateway_rest_api.test", "policy", expectedPolicyText),
+				),
+			},


We should add test steps that attempt to:

update the policy

remove the policy

Test steps for update and removal have been added

robwittman

Thanks @bflad. I removed the Sprintf() and was still getting the encoding issues. I pulled in net/url and used QueryUnescape when reading the resource, similar to resource_aws_iam_user_policy, and still no luck.

If I log the unescaped policy during resourceAwsApiGatewayRestApiRead(), i get

2018/04/17 09:08:28 [DEBUG] Decoded Policy: {\"Version\":\"2012-10-17\",\"Statement\":[{\"Effect\":\"Allow\",\"Principal\":{\"AWS\":\"*\"},\"Action\":\"execute-api:Invoke\",\"Resource\":\"*\"}]}

which I believe is to be expected. However, the tests still fail, and terraform plan keeps trying to update the API Gateway on AWS.

I also added test steps for explicitly testing update / removal, but don't think they're running since the 1st step is failing.

robwittman · 2018-04-17T16:12:15Z

aws/resource_aws_api_gateway_rest_api_test.go

+				Check: resource.ComposeTestCheckFunc(
+					resource.TestCheckResourceAttr("aws_api_gateway_rest_api.test", "policy", expectedPolicyText),
+				),
+			},


Test steps for update and removal have been added

bflad · 2018-04-17T17:44:39Z

2018/04/17 17:25:05 [DEBUG] Creating API Gateway
2018/04/17 17:25:05 [DEBUG] [aws-sdk-go] DEBUG: Request apigateway/CreateRestApi Details:
---[ REQUEST POST-SIGN ]-----------------------------
POST /restapis HTTP/1.1
Host: apigateway.us-west-2.amazonaws.com
User-Agent: aws-sdk-go/1.13.28 (go1.9.4; linux; amd64) APN/1.0 HashiCorp/1.0 Terraform/0.11.7
Content-Length: 340
Accept: application/json
Authorization: AWS4-HMAC-SHA256 Credential=AKIAIXP7QHO656Q4VL7Q/20180417/us-west-2/apigateway/aws4_request, SignedHeaders=accept;content-length;host;x-amz-date, Signature=20fa93182d1582f6307b208a6292fd2a28998a6986d2fb3b2509fc59f5f41100
X-Amz-Date: 20180417T172505Z
Accept-Encoding: gzip

{"minimumCompressionSize":0,"name":"bar","policy":"{\n    \"Version\": \"2012-10-17\",\n    \"Statement\": [\n        {\n            \"Effect\": \"Allow\",\n            \"Principal\": {\n                \"AWS\": \"*\"\n            },\n            \"Action\": \"execute-api:Invoke\",\n            \"Resource\": \"*\"\n        }\n    ]\n}\n"}
-----------------------------------------------------
2018/04/17 17:25:05 [DEBUG] [aws-sdk-go] DEBUG: Response apigateway/CreateRestApi Details:
---[ RESPONSE ]--------------------------------------
HTTP/2.0 201 Created
Content-Length: 375
Content-Type: application/json
Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2018 17:25:05 GMT
X-Amzn-Requestid: 45057bd1-4264-11e8-9c50-2b55ed529d4e


-----------------------------------------------------
2018/04/17 17:25:05 [DEBUG] [aws-sdk-go] {"apiKeySource":"HEADER","createdDate":1523985905,"endpointConfiguration":{"ipv6":false,"types":["EDGE"]},"id":"uhiblicswd","minimumCompressionSize":0,"name":"bar","policy":"{\\\"Version\\\":\\\"2012-10-17\\\",\\\"Statement\\\":[{\\\"Effect\\\":\\\"Allow\\\",\\\"Principal\\\":{\\\"AWS\\\":\\\"*\\\"},\\\"Action\\\":\\\"execute-api:Invoke\\\",\\\"Resource\\\":\\\"*\\\"}]}"}

This is likely happening because the API Gateway service uses JSON for its own API, which requires the extra escaping in its own response. It might make sense, odd as it is, to double unescape the policy that comes back from API Gateway and comment in the code why this is happening.

robwittman · 2018-04-19T21:40:05Z

Here's what Im using to try and double decode, but the tests are still failing for the same reason.

if api.Policy != nil {
		policy, err := url.QueryUnescape(*api.Policy)
		log.Printf("[DEBUG] Policy: %s", policy)
		if err != nil {
			return err
		}
		decodedPolicy, err := url.QueryUnescape(policy)
		log.Printf("[DEBUG] Decoded Policy: %s", decodedPolicy)
		if err != nil {
			return err
		}
		if err := d.Set("policy", decodedPolicy); err != nil {
			return err
		}
	}

If I debug the value in d.Set() during testing, the policy is showing 2018/04/19 14:25:22 [DEBUG] Value: {\"Version\":\"2012-10-17\",\"Statement\":[{\"Effect\":\"Allow\",\"Principal\":{\"AWS\":\"*\"},\"Action\":\"execute-api:Invoke\",\"Resource\":\"*\"}]} which looks like the correct value.

Logging the outputs of d.Set(), field_writer_map.go's setPrimitive(), and d.GetOk() all return what looks to be an unescaped string, as the test is expecting, but its still getting escaped somewhere?

bflad · 2018-04-20T17:15:05Z

Hi @robwittman! Thanks for really diving into this. I found a working configuration:

	// The API returns policy as an escaped JSON string
	// {\\\"Version\\\":\\\"2012-10-17\\\",...}
	policy, err := strconv.Unquote(`"` + aws.StringValue(api.Policy) + `"`)
	if err != nil {
		return fmt.Errorf("error unescaping policy: %s", err)
	}
	d.Set("policy", policy)

This passes all acceptance testing 👍 Merging with your commits plus this one on top.

make testacc TEST=./aws TESTARGS='-run=TestAccAWSAPIGatewayRestApi'
==> Checking that code complies with gofmt requirements...
TF_ACC=1 go test ./aws -v -run=TestAccAWSAPIGatewayRestApi -timeout 120m
=== RUN   TestAccAWSAPIGatewayRestApi_basic
--- PASS: TestAccAWSAPIGatewayRestApi_basic (25.68s)
=== RUN   TestAccAWSAPIGatewayRestApi_policy
--- PASS: TestAccAWSAPIGatewayRestApi_policy (32.48s)
=== RUN   TestAccAWSAPIGatewayRestApi_openapi
--- PASS: TestAccAWSAPIGatewayRestApi_openapi (32.38s)
PASS
ok  	github.com/terraform-providers/terraform-provider-aws/aws	90.587s

robwittman · 2018-04-20T20:08:13Z

Thanks @bflad , appreciate the help. Looking forward to release!

bflad · 2018-04-25T15:49:47Z

This has been released in version 1.16.0 of the AWS provider. Please see the Terraform documentation on provider versioning or reach out if you need any assistance upgrading.

bazron · 2018-04-26T08:50:39Z

Not this is the place to leave this, but using this policy:
policy = <<EOF
{
"Version": "2012-10-17",
"Statement": [
{
"Effect": "Allow",
"Principal": "",
"Action": "execute-api:Invoke",
"Resource": [
"execute-api://POST/notifications"
],
"Condition": {
"IpAddress": {
"aws:SourceIp": [
"xxx", "yyy", "zzz"
]
}
}
}
]
}
EOF
}

I get this error: "error unescaping policy: invalid syntax"
It looks to like the correct syntax. What's incorrect?

danieladams456 · 2018-04-26T20:02:43Z

Same issue, was there a reason it was done differently than the other IAM policies?

resource "aws_api_gateway_rest_api" "api" {
  name        = "${var.api_gateway_name}"
  description = "${var.api_gateway_description}"

  policy = <<EOF
{
  "Version": "2012-10-17",
  "Statement": [
    {
      "Effect": "Allow",
      "Principal": "*",
      "Action": "execute-api:Invoke",
      "Resource": "*",
      "Condition": {
        "IpAddress": {
          "aws:SourceIp": "xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx/xx"
        }
      }
    }
  ]
}
EOF
}

bazron · 2018-04-30T06:20:29Z

Hey @bflad ,
Just wondering if you guys are going to look at this issue.

bflad · 2018-04-30T13:08:34Z

Please open a new issue filling in the template (if one has not already been opened) so we have all the relevant details to troubleshoot, specifically the debug logging.

ghost · 2020-04-06T17:28:39Z

I'm going to lock this issue because it has been closed for 30 days ⏳. This helps our maintainers find and focus on the active issues.

If you feel this issue should be reopened, we encourage creating a new issue linking back to this one for added context. Thanks!

Rob Wittman added 8 commits April 13, 2018 14:39

Add policy field to api_gteway

035b4da

Revert tests

f7c81c1

Add policy to aws_api_gateway_rest_api documentation

59575bf

Stashing, test still failing

aeffaa4

Adding policy, but diff failing

ad8fd85

Move policy to separate test case

f055976

Remove comment

2e9f9ef

Remove computed attribute

6be5d96

ghost added the size/M Managed by automation to categorize the size of a PR. label Apr 15, 2018

Remove unused func

df094cb

bflad added enhancement Requests to existing resources that expand the functionality or scope. service/apigateway Issues and PRs that pertain to the apigateway service. labels Apr 17, 2018

bflad reviewed Apr 17, 2018

View reviewed changes

bflad added the waiting-response Maintainers are waiting on response from community or contributor. label Apr 17, 2018

Add tests steps for update / remove policy, condesne policy setter

c953fde

ghost added size/L Managed by automation to categorize the size of a PR. and removed size/M Managed by automation to categorize the size of a PR. labels Apr 17, 2018

robwittman commented Apr 17, 2018

View reviewed changes

bflad removed the waiting-response Maintainers are waiting on response from community or contributor. label Apr 20, 2018

bflad added this to the v1.16.0 milestone Apr 20, 2018

bflad merged commit c953fde into hashicorp:master Apr 20, 2018

bflad added a commit that referenced this pull request Apr 20, 2018

Update CHANGELOG for #4211

80b41d3

bflad mentioned this pull request Apr 20, 2018

Feature Request: Support resource policy when creating AWS api gateway #4171

Closed

danieladams456 mentioned this pull request Apr 30, 2018

API Gateway Resource Policy JSON #4397

Closed

ghost locked and limited conversation to collaborators Apr 6, 2020

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

[WIP] Add policy attribute to aws_api_gateway_rest_api #4211

[WIP] Add policy attribute to aws_api_gateway_rest_api #4211

robwittman commented Apr 15, 2018

bflad left a comment

bflad Apr 17, 2018

bflad Apr 17, 2018

bflad Apr 17, 2018 •

edited

Loading

robwittman Apr 17, 2018

robwittman left a comment

robwittman Apr 17, 2018

bflad commented Apr 17, 2018

robwittman commented Apr 19, 2018

bflad commented Apr 20, 2018 •

edited

Loading

robwittman commented Apr 20, 2018

bflad commented Apr 25, 2018

bazron commented Apr 26, 2018

danieladams456 commented Apr 26, 2018

bazron commented Apr 30, 2018

bflad commented Apr 30, 2018

ghost commented Apr 6, 2020

[WIP] Add policy attribute to aws_api_gateway_rest_api #4211

[WIP] Add policy attribute to aws_api_gateway_rest_api #4211

Conversation

robwittman commented Apr 15, 2018

bflad left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

bflad Apr 17, 2018

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

bflad Apr 17, 2018

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

bflad Apr 17, 2018 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

robwittman Apr 17, 2018

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

robwittman left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

robwittman Apr 17, 2018

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

bflad commented Apr 17, 2018

robwittman commented Apr 19, 2018

bflad commented Apr 20, 2018 • edited Loading

robwittman commented Apr 20, 2018

bflad commented Apr 25, 2018

bazron commented Apr 26, 2018

danieladams456 commented Apr 26, 2018

bazron commented Apr 30, 2018

bflad commented Apr 30, 2018

ghost commented Apr 6, 2020

bflad Apr 17, 2018 •

edited

Loading

bflad commented Apr 20, 2018 •

edited

Loading