5 ms·

> CloudShell is intended to be used from the AWS Management Console and does not currently support programmatic interaction Which unfortunately means I can onl

by bgs113 6y ago

> CloudShell is intended to be used from the AWS Management Console and does not currently support programmatic interaction Which unfortunately means I can only access this from a browser window and can't start up a session from my own terminal. Sure would be nice to be able to launch a secure, remote CLI without all the limitations of a web client.

RKearney 6y ago
You mean like Cloud9? https://aws.amazon.com/cloud9/ https://aws.amazon.com/cloud9/
- NeutronStar 6y ago
  "AWS Cloud9 is a cloud-based integrated development environment (IDE) that lets you write, run, and debug your code with just a browser." I would say no.
  - RKearney 6y ago
    You can easily SSH to a Cloud9 instance, so it would satisfy the criteria given. Alternatively, one can launch a custom AMI in EC2 to do whatever they want. Multiple solutions already exist for the given problem, therefore yet another AWS service seems unnecessary.
    - bgs113 6y ago
      Except that Cloud9 requires an EC2 instance and associated spend, whereas CloudShell is free.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
bdcravens 6y ago
I think this is meant as an alternative to having the cli installed locally. What is the advantage to you of running a remote AWS cli session from your terminal?
- derefr 6y ago
  The same thing you get from AWS WorkSpaces, but in CLI form: a machine that's running within/adjacent to your corporate VPC, with fast high-bandwidth access to all your internal infrastructure, especially things like storage buckets. As opposed to your own machine, running half-way across the country where you might only be able to achieve 10Mbps between you and the AWS datacenter. Think "I'll run this arbitrary script to batch-process input-bucket X to output-bucket Y, enriching the data by calling out to internal service Foo and external service Bar." The kind of thing Google's Cloud Dataflow is for, but one-off and freeform. —also, for a lot of people, just the fact that things are running in the cloud, means they're running more reliably. If you want to run something that's going to take four days to finish, you don't want to do it on your own workstation. What if the power cuts out in your house? (Just the fact that you can restart/OS-update your local computer and "keep your place" in the remote is nice, too.) You want a remote VM somewhere (preferably with live migration in case of host maintenance) running screen(1) or tmux(1), with your job inside it. Of course, you can just create a regular VM in your VPC, and do it on top of that; but a cloud shell abstracts that away, and "garbage collects" after itself if you leave it idle.
  - hrez 6y ago
    Except it doesn't run in any of your VPC's.
    - _alex_ 6y ago
      Not yet
alFReD-NSH 6y ago
The point of CloudShell is to easy use AWS CLI without setting it up and setting the credentials, however to use this from your own terminal, it means you have to install software and then configure credentials, well then that would exactly same as installing AWS CLI and configuring it.
- joseph 6y ago
  I think the issue is that web based terminals aren't very usable, as they mess with keybindings and line wrapping, for example. At least that is the case with GCP Cloud Shell. It makes it pretty difficult to use for even basic things like running vi or emacs.
  - isaveyou 6y ago
    Doesnt save link as a PWA make it behave like yet another electron app with regards to key capture?
  - ohyeshedid 6y ago
    You can connect via ssh to a GCP cloudshell instance, you just need to spin it up first.
- yjftsjthsd-h 6y ago
  On the flip side: How is installing a browser and authenticating in it any better than installing openssh and/or awscli and authenticating through them?
  - acdha 6y ago
    MFA and persistence — especially if you use SSO. If you have credentials sitting around in your home directory they can be harvested from a standard location by malware and people are often very slow to rotate them. In contrast, if you're following Amazon's guidelines your console login will already have MFA and be using short-term credentials.
    - 6y ago
staticassertion 6y ago
You can SSH via AWS Systems Manager. https://docs.aws.amazon.com/systems-manager/latest/userguide/session-manager-getting-started-enable-ssh-connections.html https://docs.aws.amazon.com/systems-manager/latest/userguide...
- hrez 6y ago
  to cloudshell?
  - Kiro 6y ago
    What would the difference be? Isn't CloudShell just a shell that you can easily access from the browser?
    - hrez 6y ago
      managed vs self-managed among other things
gizmodo59 6y ago
I think something like this: $gcloud alpha cloud-shell ssh I love to be able to use my terminal client than browser. This is neat because I don't want to maintain another ec2 myself even if its in the free tier.
_alex_ 6y ago
I think you just described ssh

by bgs113 6y ago

RKearney 6y ago

You mean like Cloud9? https://aws.amazon.com/cloud9/ https://aws.amazon.com/cloud9/

NeutronStar 6y ago
"AWS Cloud9 is a cloud-based integrated development environment (IDE) that lets you write, run, and debug your code with just a browser." I would say no.
- RKearney 6y ago
  You can easily SSH to a Cloud9 instance, so it would satisfy the criteria given. Alternatively, one can launch a custom AMI in EC2 to do whatever they want. Multiple solutions already exist for the given problem, therefore yet another AWS service seems unnecessary.
  - bgs113 6y ago
    Except that Cloud9 requires an EC2 instance and associated spend, whereas CloudShell is free.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

bdcravens 6y ago

I think this is meant as an alternative to having the cli installed locally. What is the advantage to you of running a remote AWS cli session from your terminal?

derefr 6y ago
The same thing you get from AWS WorkSpaces, but in CLI form: a machine that's running within/adjacent to your corporate VPC, with fast high-bandwidth access to all your internal infrastructure, especially things like storage buckets. As opposed to your own machine, running half-way across the country where you might only be able to achieve 10Mbps between you and the AWS datacenter. Think "I'll run this arbitrary script to batch-process input-bucket X to output-bucket Y, enriching the data by calling out to internal service Foo and external service Bar." The kind of thing Google's Cloud Dataflow is for, but one-off and freeform. —also, for a lot of people, just the fact that things are running in the cloud, means they're running more reliably. If you want to run something that's going to take four days to finish, you don't want to do it on your own workstation. What if the power cuts out in your house? (Just the fact that you can restart/OS-update your local computer and "keep your place" in the remote is nice, too.) You want a remote VM somewhere (preferably with live migration in case of host maintenance) running screen(1) or tmux(1), with your job inside it. Of course, you can just create a regular VM in your VPC, and do it on top of that; but a cloud shell abstracts that away, and "garbage collects" after itself if you leave it idle.
- hrez 6y ago
  Except it doesn't run in any of your VPC's.
  - _alex_ 6y ago
    Not yet

alFReD-NSH 6y ago

The point of CloudShell is to easy use AWS CLI without setting it up and setting the credentials, however to use this from your own terminal, it means you have to install software and then configure credentials, well then that would exactly same as installing AWS CLI and configuring it.

joseph 6y ago
I think the issue is that web based terminals aren't very usable, as they mess with keybindings and line wrapping, for example. At least that is the case with GCP Cloud Shell. It makes it pretty difficult to use for even basic things like running vi or emacs.
- isaveyou 6y ago
  Doesnt save link as a PWA make it behave like yet another electron app with regards to key capture?
- ohyeshedid 6y ago
  You can connect via ssh to a GCP cloudshell instance, you just need to spin it up first.
yjftsjthsd-h 6y ago
On the flip side: How is installing a browser and authenticating in it any better than installing openssh and/or awscli and authenticating through them?
- acdha 6y ago
  MFA and persistence — especially if you use SSO. If you have credentials sitting around in your home directory they can be harvested from a standard location by malware and people are often very slow to rotate them. In contrast, if you're following Amazon's guidelines your console login will already have MFA and be using short-term credentials.
  - 6y ago

staticassertion 6y ago

You can SSH via AWS Systems Manager. https://docs.aws.amazon.com/systems-manager/latest/userguide/session-manager-getting-started-enable-ssh-connections.html https://docs.aws.amazon.com/systems-manager/latest/userguide...

hrez 6y ago
to cloudshell?
- Kiro 6y ago
  What would the difference be? Isn't CloudShell just a shell that you can easily access from the browser?
  - hrez 6y ago
    managed vs self-managed among other things

gizmodo59 6y ago

I think something like this: $gcloud alpha cloud-shell ssh I love to be able to use my terminal client than browser. This is neat because I don't want to maintain another ec2 myself even if its in the free tier.

_alex_ 6y ago

I think you just described ssh