Skip to content
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

Key Vaults should use RBAC instead of access policies for access control #4000

Closed
2 tasks
SvenAelterman opened this issue Jun 23, 2024 · 2 comments · Fixed by #4115 or #4133
Closed
2 tasks

Key Vaults should use RBAC instead of access policies for access control #4000

SvenAelterman opened this issue Jun 23, 2024 · 2 comments · Fixed by #4115 or #4133
Labels
breaking-change PR contains a breaking change that needs to be highlighted or documented story Stories are the smallest unit of work to be done for a project.

Comments

@SvenAelterman
Copy link
Collaborator

Description

As a TRE Administrator
I want to use the recommended configurations for Azure resources
So that feature deprecations, etc. won't affect a production environment

Acceptance criteria

  • Key Vaults deployed by TRE use Azure RBAC for access control
  • A migration path is documented for existing TRE instances
@SvenAelterman SvenAelterman added story Stories are the smallest unit of work to be done for a project. breaking-change PR contains a breaking change that needs to be highlighted or documented labels Jun 23, 2024
jonnyry added a commit to nwsde/nwsde-azuretre that referenced this issue Oct 28, 2024
@SvenAelterman
Copy link
Collaborator Author

@marrobi @jonnyry When will this be published to a new release?

@marrobi
Copy link
Member

marrobi commented Jan 15, 2025

We will look to get a release done in the next week or two.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
breaking-change PR contains a breaking change that needs to be highlighted or documented story Stories are the smallest unit of work to be done for a project.
Projects
None yet
2 participants