-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 151
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Defender for Cloud Security Recommendations #4303
Comments
@West-P are you running the v0.19.1 release? Some of these have been fixed up in main, and we plan to get a new release out in the coming weeks. Then its worth re-evaluating. There are reasons why some of these are why they are. Some of the above I would advise you implement via subscription wide policy, rather than actually in code in this project. cc @tamirkamara |
Yes this is from v0.19.1 |
I've been working through a similar Defender list for our deployment, can comment on a few:
Requires TLS 1.3 to be set. I've fixed locally in our instance. @marrobi are we happy to set TLS 1.3 as the minimum in this repo? It requires an azurerm provider bump.
This is a $2.5K / month service. Should be optional if it is remediated in this repo.
PR for this one here: #4260 Waiting for a merge - @marrobi ;-)
We've fixed locally, happy to PR back here?
This was merged in the last week - #4263 Assuming you have that update and your machines are showing as EncryptionAtHost enabled, you may still be seeing the error because Guest Configuration is not able to audit the machine.
I think most of the shared key access has been removed where possible. There are some accounts that still need a shared key in order to mount the file share on VMs. |
A couple more for the list:
|
Thanks guys. Lets get the PRs merged, and see where we are, tick things off the list there is also this issue #2171 ... |
There are a number of security findings from Azure Defender for Cloud. Let me know if an issue needs to be created for each of these but here is the list from a TRE deployment with an airlock in place with a workspace using Databricks, VMs, AzureML and SQL services enabled:
I understand that potentially some of these findings may have already been highlighted and some may not be possible without breaking functionality. But it would be useful to know the justifications for this to audit the security findings on a customer's system and if our client/s have any questions on the vulnerabilities found.
We can potentially resolve most of these ourselves but it would be good for the repo to be updated, especially things like TLS version updates and making sure VMs created have the recommended extensions with Update Management and Backup in place.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: