pubsys: added SSM parameter validation #2969

mjsterckx · 2023-03-30T18:44:09Z

Inspired by #2617
Related to #2621

Description of changes:

Added a validate_ssm mod to the pubsys crate. This mod adds a subcommand validate-ssm with the following signature:

pubsys-validate-ssm 0.1.0
Validates SSM parameters and AMIs

USAGE:
    pubsys --infra-config-path <infra-config-path> validate-ssm [OPTIONS] --validation-config-path <validation-config-path>

FLAGS:
    -h, --help       Prints help information
    -V, --version    Prints version information

OPTIONS:
        --validation-config-path <validation-config-path>    File holding the validation configuration
        --write-results-path <write-results-path>            
        --write-results-filter <write-results-filter>...     
        --log-level <log-level>
            How much detail to log; from least to most: ERROR, WARN, INFO, DEBUG, TRACE [default: INFO]

validation-config-path is the path to the file containing the validation configuration. This file should look like this:

{
    "validation_regions": [ "us-west-2", "us-east-1" ],
    "expected_parameter_lists": [ "./canary/ssm/ami_lists/1.11.0.json", "./canary/ssm/ami_lists/1.11.1.json", "./canary/ssm/ami_lists/1.12.0.json", "./canary/ssm/ami_lists/latest.json" ]
}

Each expected_parameter_list should have the following structure:

{
  "us-west-2": {
    "ami-12345678": {
      "/aws/service/bottlerocket/aws-ecs-1-nvidia/arm64/1.12.0-6ef1139f/image_id": "ami-12345678",
      "/aws/service/bottlerocket/aws-ecs-1-nvidia/arm64/1.12.0-6ef1139f/image_version": "1.12.0-abcdefgh",
      "/aws/service/bottlerocket/aws-ecs-1-nvidia/arm64/1.12.0/image_id": "ami-12345678",
      "/aws/service/bottlerocket/aws-ecs-1-nvidia/arm64/1.12.0/image_version": "1.12.0-abcdefgh"
    },
    "ami-082d59d8979d777a6": {
      "/aws/service/bottlerocket/aws-ecs-1-nvidia/x86_64/1.12.0-6ef1139f/image_id": "ami-87654321",
      "/aws/service/bottlerocket/aws-ecs-1-nvidia/x86_64/1.12.0-6ef1139f/image_version": "1.12.0-hgfedcba",
      "/aws/service/bottlerocket/aws-ecs-1-nvidia/x86_64/1.12.0/image_id": "ami-87654321",
      "/aws/service/bottlerocket/aws-ecs-1-nvidia/x86_64/1.12.0/image_version": "1.12.0-hgfedcba"
    },`
    ...
  },
  "us-east-1": {
    ...
  }
}

write-results-path is the path to the file where the validation results will be written. The file will look like this:

[
  {
    "name": "/aws/service/bottlerocket/aws-k8s-1.22-nvidia/arm64/latest/image_id",
    "expected_value": "ami-12345678",
    "actual_value": "ami-23456789",
    "region": "eu-west-2",
    "ami_id": "ami-12345678",
    "status": "Incorrect"
  },
  {
    "name": "/aws/service/bottlerocket/aws-k8s-1.25-nvidia/arm64/latest/image_id",
    "expected_value": "ami-34567890",
    "actual_value": "ami-45678901",
    "region": "eu-central-1",
    "ami_id": "ami-34567890",
    "status": "Incorrect"
  },
  ...
]

write-results-filter is a vec of potential statuses, which limits the validation results written to the above file. If the vec contains Correct and Incorrect, then only the validation results with those statuses will be written to the file and Missing and Unexpected validation results will not.

The command outputs a tabled summary of the validation results. This table will look like this:

+----------------+---------+-----------+---------+------------+------------+
| String         | correct | incorrect | missing | unexpected | accessible |
+----------------+---------+-----------+---------+------------+------------+
| ap-southeast-2 | 2212    | 40        | 0       | 200        | true       |
+----------------+---------+-----------+---------+------------+------------+
| eu-west-1      | 2212    | 40        | 0       | 200        | true       |
+----------------+---------+-----------+---------+------------+------------+
| eu-north-1     | 2212    | 40        | 0       | 200        | true       |
+----------------+---------+-----------+---------+------------+------------+
| us-east-1      | 2232    | 40        | 0       | 200        | true       |
+----------------+---------+-----------+---------+------------+------------+
| us-west-2      | 2232    | 40        | 0       | 200        | true       |
+----------------+---------+-----------+---------+------------+------------+
| ca-central-1   | 2212    | 40        | 0       | 200        | true       |
+----------------+---------+-----------+---------+------------+------------+
| us-east-2      | 2212    | 40        | 0       | 200        | true       |
+----------------+---------+-----------+---------+------------+------------+
| eu-west-3      | 2212    | 40        | 0       | 200        | true       |
+----------------+---------+-----------+---------+------------+------------+
| ap-south-1     | 2222    | 40        | 0       | 200        | true       |
+----------------+---------+-----------+---------+------------+------------+
| ap-northeast-3 | 1820    | 40        | 0       | 200        | true       |
+----------------+---------+-----------+---------+------------+------------+
| ap-southeast-1 | 2212    | 40        | 0       | 200        | true       |
+----------------+---------+-----------+---------+------------+------------+
| eu-west-2      | 2212    | 40        | 0       | 200        | true       |
+----------------+---------+-----------+---------+------------+------------+
| eu-central-1   | 2232    | 40        | 0       | 200        | true       |
+----------------+---------+-----------+---------+------------+------------+
| ap-northeast-2 | 2212    | 40        | 0       | 200        | true       |
+----------------+---------+-----------+---------+------------+------------+
| sa-east-1      | 2212    | 40        | 0       | 200        | true       |
+----------------+---------+-----------+---------+------------+------------+
| us-west-1      | 2212    | 40        | 0       | 200        | true       |
+----------------+---------+-----------+---------+------------+------------+
| ap-northeast-1 | 2232    | 40        | 0       | 200        | true       |
+----------------+---------+-----------+---------+------------+------------+

The meaning of the different columns is this:

correct: the expected value of the parameter is equal to the retrieved value
incorrect: the expected value of the parameter is different from the retrieved value
missing: the parameter was expected in that region but not retrieved
unexpected: the retrieved parameter was not expected in that region
accessible: SSM parameters were successfully retrieved from that region. If an invalid region was given, this would say false and all other columns in that row would show -1

Testing done:

Unit tests
Manually retrieved public SSM parameters and used them as input for the subcommand. Before the 1.13.0 release, all parameters showed as correct. After the 1.13.0 and 1.13.1 releases, each monitored region has 40 incorrect parameters (which is latest, because I didn't update my local copies of the parameters) and 200 unexpected parameters (which are the 1.13.0 and 1.13.1 parameters).

Terms of contribution:

By submitting this pull request, I agree that this contribution is dual-licensed under the terms of both the Apache License, version 2.0, and the MIT license.

mjsterckx · 2023-03-30T19:06:17Z

^ clippy fixes

tools/pubsys/src/aws/validate_ssm/mod.rs

webern · 2023-03-31T17:32:17Z

tools/pubsys/src/aws/validate_ssm/mod.rs

+    #[structopt(long, parse(from_os_str))]
+    validation_config_path: PathBuf,
+
+    // Optional path where the validation results should be written


Actually important so that structopt will add this information to the help messages.

Suggested change

// Optional path where the validation results should be written

/// Optional path where the validation results should be written

tools/pubsys/src/aws/validate_ssm/mod.rs

webern · 2023-03-31T17:36:49Z

tools/pubsys/src/aws/validate_ssm/mod.rs

+    validation_regions: Vec<String>,
+}
+
+/// Structure of an SSM parameter value


When we have to do something strange, it's a good idea to explain in detail.

Suggested change

/// Structure of an SSM parameter value

/// A structure that allows us to store a parameter value along with the AMI ID it refers to. In

/// some cases, then AMI ID *is* the parameter value and both fields will hold the AMI ID. In other

/// cases the parameter value is not the AMI ID, but we need to remember which AMI ID it refers to.

tools/pubsys/src/aws/validate_ssm/mod.rs

tools/pubsys/src/aws/validate_ssm/results.rs

tools/pubsys/src/aws/ssm/ssm.rs

cbgbt · 2023-03-31T18:42:22Z

tools/pubsys/src/aws/validate_ssm/mod.rs

+/// Structure of the validation configuration file
+#[derive(Debug, Deserialize)]
+pub(crate) struct ValidationConfig {
+    // Vec of paths to JSON files containing expected parameters


It's not as important as the structopt comments @webern pointed out, but it's good form to use docstring comments on attributes as well, since they would be added to any generated rustdocs.

gthao313 · 2023-04-05T21:55:42Z

tools/pubsys/src/aws/ssm/ssm.rs

+        for parameter in page
+            .context(error::GetParametersByPathSnafu {
+                path: ssm_prefix,
+                region: region.to_string(),
+            })?
+            .parameters()
+            .unwrap_or_default()


NIT: I think this can be easier to read.

Suggested change

for parameter in page

.context(error::GetParametersByPathSnafu {

path: ssm_prefix,

region: region.to_string(),

})?

.parameters()

.unwrap_or_default()

let retrieved_parameters = page.context(error::GetParametersByPathSnafu {

path: ssm_prefix,region: region.to_string(),

})?

.parameters()

.unwrap_or_default();

for parameter in retrieved_parameters {}

gthao313 · 2023-04-05T22:12:46Z

tools/pubsys/src/aws/validate_ssm/mod.rs

+    validation_regions: &[String],
+) -> Result<HashMap<Region, HashMap<SsmKey, SsmValue>>> {
+    let mut parameter_map: HashMap<Region, HashMap<SsmKey, SsmValue>> = HashMap::new();
+    for list in parameter_lists {


NIT: I would prefer to give it to a more expressive variable name.

Suggested change

for list in parameter_lists {

for parameter_list in parameter_lists {

gthao313 · 2023-04-05T22:41:39Z

tools/pubsys/src/aws/ssm/ssm.rs

+            );
+        }
+    }
+    info!("SSM parameters in {} retrieved", region.to_string());


Suggested change

info!("SSM parameters in {} retrieved", region.to_string());

info!("SSM parameters in {} have been retrieved", region.to_string());

gthao313 · 2023-04-05T22:56:45Z

tools/pubsys/Cargo.toml

@@ -41,6 +41,7 @@ serde_json = "1"
 simplelog = "0.12"


The code and tests look good to me! awesome!!

I think it might be better to change the commit message to

pubsys: added SSM parameter validation "a short paragraph to describe what changes you have and those changes will help to build canary something like that"

mjsterckx · 2023-04-06T01:18:24Z

^ Addressed all comments and suggested changes

webern

I updated the description to tag a couple of related issues.

I left one new comment, to use path.display().

webern · 2023-04-06T16:02:00Z

tools/pubsys/src/aws/validate_ssm/mod.rs

+        #[snafu(display("Error reading config: {}", source))]
+        Config { source: pubsys_config::Error },
+
+        #[snafu(display("Error reading validation config at path {:?}: {}", path, source))]


Paths are weird because they aren't guaranteed to be UTF-8 encoded, here's how you do it:

Suggested change

#[snafu(display("Error reading validation config at path {:?}: {}", path, source))]

#[snafu(display("Error reading validation config at path {}: {}", path.display(), source))]

webern · 2023-04-06T16:03:07Z

tools/pubsys/src/aws/validate_ssm/mod.rs

+        #[snafu(display("Infra.toml is missing {}", missing))]
+        MissingConfig { missing: String },
+
+        #[snafu(display("Failed to validate SSM parameters: {}", missing))]


The SDK will retry retryable failures twice by default. I don't think any additional retry policies are necessary on pubsys' end.

Ok, I wonder if we want to increase that number of retries. Any guesses @cbgbt or @etungsten as to how many times we should retry on SSM calls?

cbgbt · 2023-04-06T17:32:19Z

@webern @mjsterckx

Any guesses as to how many times we should retry on SSM calls?

I usually set up retries using random jitter and exponential backoff (to avoid a thundering herd) for some reasonable amount of time based on the use-case, rather than some static retry count. Maybe 30 seconds is within reason here?

We don't have great discipline with this in pubsys today. I think the functions to set parameters do their own retries, but most GETs rely on the SDK retry logic.

mjsterckx · 2023-04-06T17:41:50Z

I usually set up retries using random jitter and exponential backoff (to avoid a thundering herd) for some reasonable amount of time based on the use-case, rather than some static retry count. Maybe 30 seconds is within reason here?

It seems like that logic should be added to all get_parameters functions and not just the ones added in this PR. Would that be acceptable to move to a later PR?

Added a validate-ssm command to validate SSM parameters, given a JSON config file with regions and paths to files containing the expected parameters.

mjsterckx force-pushed the canary-ssm-validation branch from 00addcc to 06b90a8 Compare March 30, 2023 19:06

mjsterckx requested a review from cbgbt March 30, 2023 19:07

mjsterckx marked this pull request as ready for review March 30, 2023 21:13

mjsterckx requested review from webern and bcressey March 30, 2023 21:13

webern reviewed Mar 31, 2023

View reviewed changes

cbgbt reviewed Apr 4, 2023

View reviewed changes

gthao313 reviewed Apr 5, 2023

View reviewed changes

mjsterckx force-pushed the canary-ssm-validation branch from 06b90a8 to d95f41d Compare April 6, 2023 01:17

mjsterckx changed the title ~~canary: added SSM parameter validation~~ pubsys: added SSM parameter validation Apr 6, 2023

mjsterckx requested review from cbgbt, webern and gthao313 April 6, 2023 01:18

mjsterckx mentioned this pull request Apr 6, 2023

pubsys: added EC2 image validation #2983

Closed

webern approved these changes Apr 6, 2023

View reviewed changes

cbgbt approved these changes Apr 6, 2023

View reviewed changes

pubsys: added SSM parameter validation

907898f

Added a validate-ssm command to validate SSM parameters, given a JSON config file with regions and paths to files containing the expected parameters.

mjsterckx force-pushed the canary-ssm-validation branch from d95f41d to 907898f Compare April 6, 2023 17:55

cbgbt approved these changes Apr 6, 2023

View reviewed changes

mjsterckx merged commit b59757b into bottlerocket-os:develop Apr 6, 2023

mjsterckx deleted the canary-ssm-validation branch April 6, 2023 18:48

mjsterckx mentioned this pull request Apr 6, 2023

pubsys: write SSM parameters and AMI permissions to output files #2987

Merged

mjsterckx mentioned this pull request Apr 21, 2023

Makefile: added SSM and AMI validation targets #3043

Merged

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

pubsys: added SSM parameter validation #2969

pubsys: added SSM parameter validation #2969

mjsterckx commented Mar 30, 2023 •

edited by webern

Loading

mjsterckx commented Mar 30, 2023

webern Mar 31, 2023

webern Mar 31, 2023

cbgbt Mar 31, 2023

gthao313 Apr 5, 2023

gthao313 Apr 5, 2023

gthao313 Apr 5, 2023

gthao313 Apr 5, 2023 •

edited

Loading

mjsterckx commented Apr 6, 2023

webern left a comment

webern Apr 6, 2023

webern Apr 6, 2023

cbgbt commented Apr 6, 2023 •

edited

Loading

mjsterckx commented Apr 6, 2023

	// Optional path where the validation results should be written
	/// Optional path where the validation results should be written

-/// Structure of an SSM parameter value
+/// A structure that allows us to store a parameter value along with the AMI ID it refers to. In
+/// some cases, then AMI ID *is* the parameter value and both fields will hold the AMI ID. In other
+/// cases the parameter value is not the AMI ID, but we need to remember which AMI ID it refers to.

	for list in parameter_lists {
	for parameter_list in parameter_lists {

	info!("SSM parameters in {} retrieved", region.to_string());
	info!("SSM parameters in {} have been retrieved", region.to_string());

	#[snafu(display("Error reading validation config at path {:?}: {}", path, source))]
	#[snafu(display("Error reading validation config at path {}: {}", path.display(), source))]

pubsys: added SSM parameter validation #2969

pubsys: added SSM parameter validation #2969

Conversation

mjsterckx commented Mar 30, 2023 • edited by webern Loading

mjsterckx commented Mar 30, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

gthao313 Apr 5, 2023 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

mjsterckx commented Apr 6, 2023

webern left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

cbgbt commented Apr 6, 2023 • edited Loading

mjsterckx commented Apr 6, 2023

mjsterckx commented Mar 30, 2023 •

edited by webern

Loading

gthao313 Apr 5, 2023 •

edited

Loading

cbgbt commented Apr 6, 2023 •

edited

Loading