Skip to main content

(Azure) Difference between Shared Access Signature and Shared Access Policy

In this post we will discuss about Shared Access Signature and Shared Access Policy, focusing on what are the different between them.

Let's start with Shared Access Signature (SAS). It provides delectated access to a specific Azure resource. We can specify the resources that we want to allow access, how long we allow access (start and end time) and what kind of operations can be done.
The SAS key is like a token, that can be used by a 3rd party to access a specific resource. In general, the SAS key is included in the URL that is used to access the resource.
A SAS token can be generated very easily and will be available until the expiration time. What happens when we realize that the token is in hands of an unauthorized person or system. Unfortunately we cannot revoce the token. What we can do in this case is to revoke all the SAS tokens that were created with a specific account key. By regenerating the primary account key of a Azure Storage for example we will invalidate all the SAS tokens that were generated with that specific account key.

Shared Access Policy (SAP) define a specific policy rule that can be used to generate SAS keys. All the access constrains that are define by a SAP will be inherit by the SAS key (resource, expiration time, start time and permissions).

In this way we can define a specific SAP that allow us read only access to a file and generate multiple SAS keys for different clients, based on that SAP. If we need to revoke the SAS key, we can remove the SAP with the given name and generate a new one (with a new name). In this way all SAS key that were generated for that SAP will be invalid.

When you are using SAP you are allowed to change the access tuple (expiration time, permission and so on). This can be done directly to SAP. But when we are using SAS, we are not allowed to edit the SAS key. The only thing that we can do is to revoke it (change the account key).

SAS and SAP Comparison
- -SAS-
-SAP-
Can be revoked separately
No
Yes
Can be changed
No
Yes
Number of keys per resource is limited
No
Yes, but we can generate for a SAP as many SAS we need
When generated, triggers an HTTP/S request to Azure
No
Yes

In conclusion, we can say that Shared Access Signature and Shared Access Policy are very similar, but in the same time there are some attributes that are specific to SAS or SAP. Based on our needs we can decided to use one or another.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Windows Docker Containers can make WIN32 API calls, use COM and ASP.NET WebForms

After the last post , I received two interesting questions related to Docker and Windows. People were interested if we do Win32 API calls from a Docker container and if there is support for COM. WIN32 Support To test calls to WIN32 API, let’s try to populate SYSTEM_INFO class. [StructLayout(LayoutKind.Sequential)] public struct SYSTEM_INFO { public uint dwOemId; public uint dwPageSize; public uint lpMinimumApplicationAddress; public uint lpMaximumApplicationAddress; public uint dwActiveProcessorMask; public uint dwNumberOfProcessors; public uint dwProcessorType; public uint dwAllocationGranularity; public uint dwProcessorLevel; public uint dwProcessorRevision; } ... [DllImport("kernel32")] static extern void GetSystemInfo(ref SYSTEM_INFO pSI); ... SYSTEM_INFO pSI = new SYSTEM_INFO(

Azure AD and AWS Cognito side-by-side

In the last few weeks, I was involved in multiple opportunities on Microsoft Azure and Amazon, where we had to analyse AWS Cognito, Azure AD and other solutions that are available on the market. I decided to consolidate in one post all features and differences that I identified for both of them that we should need to take into account. Take into account that Azure AD is an identity and access management services well integrated with Microsoft stack. In comparison, AWS Cognito is just a user sign-up, sign-in and access control and nothing more. The focus is not on the main features, is more on small things that can make a difference when you want to decide where we want to store and manage our users.  This information might be useful in the future when we need to decide where we want to keep and manage our users.  Feature Azure AD (B2C, B2C) AWS Cognito Access token lifetime Default 1h – the value is configurable 1h – cannot be modified

ADO.NET provider with invariant name 'System.Data.SqlClient' could not be loaded

Today blog post will be started with the following error when running DB tests on the CI machine: threw exception: System.InvalidOperationException: The Entity Framework provider type 'System.Data.Entity.SqlServer.SqlProviderServices, EntityFramework.SqlServer' registered in the application config file for the ADO.NET provider with invariant name 'System.Data.SqlClient' could not be loaded. Make sure that the assembly-qualified name is used and that the assembly is available to the running application. See http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=260882 for more information. at System.Data.Entity.Infrastructure.DependencyResolution.ProviderServicesFactory.GetInstance(String providerTypeName, String providerInvariantName) This error happened only on the Continuous Integration machine. On the devs machines, everything has fine. The classic problem – on my machine it’s working. The CI has the following configuration: TeamCity .NET 4.51 EF 6.0.2 VS2013 It see