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

GR9 | Validation 3 | Logic Shift - Independent Subscription Compliance to Tenant Wide Compliance #369

Open
MathesonSho opened this issue Jan 17, 2025 · 0 comments · Fixed by #374
Assignees
Labels
enhancement New feature or request Iteration #1 Before V2.0 go-live V2.0 Applicable for updating to v2.0

Comments

@MathesonSho
Copy link
Contributor

Azure CaC current version
v2.1.5

Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
Current evaluation gives a compliance status on Compliant, non-compliant and not applicable per subscription which is working as expected.

In reality, departments are likely to use one firewall and route each subscriptions traffic through that firewall (configured in another subscription). There may be some cases where many tools are used, however; in general there's not likely to be duplication in every single subscription.

Describe the solution you'd like

Phase 1 Improvement...
Each subscription is required to be evaluated however, in the event a firewall or a Application Gateway with WAF enabled is found the status for one validation called Tools In Use For Limiting Access To Authorized Source IP Addresses (M) will be compliant.

If there isn't anything present that meets the criteria across the tenant then the validation will be non-compliant.

For MCUP scenarios the profile tag will be used to determine which subscriptions to include and exclude from the check. i.e., it could skip over ones that are Not Applicable.

Describe alternatives you've considered
Another option would be continue checking each subscription. i.e., 3 subs in the environment and 1 sub has a firewall. The compliance results for all of them update to the status of the one subscription and refer to that in comments. "this subscription is compliant due to there being a firewall present in "subscription name".

Additional context
There are further options for the team to evaluate together. Provide some suggestions.

@MathesonSho MathesonSho added enhancement New feature or request V2.0 Applicable for updating to v2.0 Iteration #1 Before V2.0 go-live labels Jan 17, 2025
@dutt0 dutt0 added the PriorityForAssignees -High This issue is considered high priority for the assignee this week label Jan 20, 2025
@dutt0 dutt0 removed the PriorityForAssignees -High This issue is considered high priority for the assignee this week label Jan 28, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request Iteration #1 Before V2.0 go-live V2.0 Applicable for updating to v2.0
Projects
None yet
3 participants