6 ms·
>> he bucket's start out __private__. Except one of the biggest initial selling points is hosting static websites, which requires the bucket to be public. They
by ticmasta 8y ago
>> he bucket's start out __private__.
Except one of the biggest initial selling points is hosting static websites, which requires the bucket to be public. They even have a shortcut UI for setting this up, but then they highlight this "security issue" that you have a public bucket, which doesn't make sense.
If you've gone to the trouble to specify the bucket is a website with default documents, etc, surely they can filter these buckets out of the ALERT! PUBLIC BUCKET! list...
- Alex3917 8y ago> Except one of the biggest initial selling points is hosting static websites, which requires the bucket to be public. Maybe S3 should just be separated into buckets and websites. They can work the same under the hood, but call them something different to prevent this issue. Right now a lot of the new (and existing) security settings don't make any sense in the context of websites, and having the functionality to make websites within S3 creates security issues for everyone else.
- akst 8y agoWhile buckets are great for pushing your static content too, I would probably put a CDN in front of it, which is pretty easy to do with CloudFront. Not only is it’s faster it’ll likely be cheaper, due to reads from S3 being more expensive than content read from a CDN. (AFAIK) Edit: that said I use to use S3 for hosting a few toy sites, that were inside jokes between my friends. For sites like that maybe glitch.com or github pages might work better ¯\_(ツ)_/¯