Hi Anand,

Thanks for bringing this up - I also agree that WIF is likely the best way
to move forward for this requirement. I agree with Yufei's concern about
caching credentials, but I think we did something similar for the AWS case
before as well - so hopefully the prior art will lead the way on solving
this!

Best,
Adnan Hemani

On Thu, Jun 11, 2026 at 5:45 PM Yufei Gu <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi Anand,
>
> I think WIF is probably the right direction for guaranteed GCS audit
> attribution, because it puts the Polaris principal into the identity chain
> instead of depending on client forwarded headers. I'm not an expert with
> GCS though, I'm open to alternatives.
>
> My main concern is the operational and performance cost. With attribution
> enabled, the cache becomes effectively principal scoped, so the real cost
> is likely cache fragmentation rather than the extra STS call itself, as the
> STS call could be cached. Currently, the cache keys explicitly do *NOT*
> include
> principal/context for GCS, so they are not principal-scoped:
> GcpStorageCredentialCacheKey.java (line 31),
> AzureStorageCredentialCacheKey.java (line 30).  It would be good to
> quantify this with the expected credential vending frequency, token TTL,
> and number of active principals.
>
> I would also prefer making this clearly optional and well documented, since
> not every deployment needs principal level GCS audit attribution.
>
> Yufei
>
>
> On Thu, Jun 11, 2026 at 9:22 AM Anand Kumar Sankaran via dev <
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
> > https://github.com/apache/polaris/issues/4706
> >
> > https://github.com/apache/polaris/pull/4707
> >
> > Polaris can correlate vended-credential data access back to the catalog
> > operation that issued the credentials on AWS — via
> > SESSION_TAGS_IN_SUBSCOPED_CREDENTIAL, which stamps  polaris:principal,
> > polaris:realm, polaris:catalog, etc. as AWS STS session tags that then
> > appear in CloudTrail S3 data events. There is no equivalent on GCP. GCS
> > Data Access audit logs cannot today be tied to the Polaris principal that
> > requested the credential, which breaks audit correlation,
> > chargeback/attribution, and incident response for GCS-backed catalogs.
> >
> > This issue and PR provide a way to achieve similar correlation using WIFs
> > in GCP.
> >
> > Please review.
> >
> > -
> > Anand
> >
>

Reply via email to