fix(query): fn for IAM_Policies_With_Full_Privileges -- terraform/aws

[cx-andre-pereira]

Reason for Proposed Changes

• This query flags for samples when IAM policies are allowed full administrative privileges; however , it will only flag this result if the Action/Resource fields of a valid IAM policy resource or the actions/resources fields of a aws_iam_policy_document data both have the * permission; with this implementation it dismisses instances of Resource/resources with the expected * permission and Action/actions fields that include "iam:*" permissions, and those results should also be flagged.

• The granted permission (iam:*) allows for the creation/edition/deletion of policies, so it ends up being equivalent to *. (aws_guide page 1665/4071 - "to allow users to perform any IAM action, you can use iam:*")

Proposed Changes

• To flag for both relevant instances (*/iam:*), i added a is_full_priviledge_permission function to replace the simple check for *, allowing either permission type to result in a true evaluation for the policy.

• When analyzing the query i found the searchLine values to be problematic , sometimes resulting in -1 ; to fix this the policy that handles aws_iam_policy_document data had to be adjusted to better handle arrays vs single instances of statement(s) inside the data. Currently this handling is poor and the searchLine/keyExpectedValue/keyActualValue/searchKey values are all incorrectly referencing "policy" instead of the aws_iam_policy_document equivalent (statements) resulting in the wrongsearchLine/Key values.

• With the better case handling the correct relevant statement will now be indicated if there are multiple statements , the searchLine/searchKey values are now valid and more precise when there is an array of statement; previously the result would point to the aws_iam_policy_document the statements belonged to instead of the relevant statement.

I submit this contribution under the Apache-2.0 license.

[github-actions]

KICS version: v2.1.11

Category Results CRITICAL 0 HIGH 0 MEDIUM 0 LOW 0 INFO 0 TRACE 0 TOTAL 0	Metric Values Files scanned 1 Files parsed 1 Files failed to scan 0 Total executed queries 47 Queries failed to execute 0 Execution time 0

[cx-eduardo-semanas]

LGTM

[gitguardian]

⚠️ GitGuardian has uncovered 2 secrets following the scan of your pull request.

Please consider investigating the findings and remediating the incidents. Failure to do so may lead to compromising the associated services or software components.

🔎 Detected hardcoded secrets in your pull request

GitGuardian id	GitGuardian status	Secret	Commit	Filename
4266022	Triggered	Generic Password	e424d49	assets/queries/cloudFormation/aws/amplify_branch_basic_auth_config_password_exposed/test/negative7.yaml	View secret
9419039	Triggered	Username Password	e424d49	assets/queries/cloudFormation/aws/amplify_app_basic_auth_config_password_exposed/test/positive6.json	View secret

🛠 Guidelines to remediate hardcoded secrets

1. Understand the implications of revoking this secret by investigating where it is used in your code.
2. Replace and store your secrets safely. Learn here the best practices.
3. Revoke and rotate these secrets.
4. If possible, rewrite git history. Rewriting git history is not a trivial act. You might completely break other contributing developers' workflow and you risk accidentally deleting legitimate data.

To avoid such incidents in the future consider

• following these best practices for managing and storing secrets including API keys and other credentials
• install secret detection on pre-commit to catch secret before it leaves your machine and ease remediation.

---

^{🦉 GitGuardian detects secrets in your source code to help developers and security teams secure the modern development process. You are seeing this because you or someone else with access to this repository has authorized GitGuardian to scan your pull request.}