By using AWS re:Post, you agree to the Terms of Use

End-to-end encryption (to be or not to be)


Hi community, What is your position on end-to-end encryption (regardless of regulations), but from a practical security point of view. Scenario: classic scenario of a web service being front-ended by an application load balancer. No questions ask we do encryption in transit for the front end part. BUT for the communication between the load balancer and the server the security position of AWS seems to be "encrypt everything" but when i read AWS documentation from sysops perspective i get the following "Terminating secure connections at the load balancer and using HTTP on the backend might be sufficient for your application. Network traffic between AWS resources can't be listened to by instances that are not part of the connection" As a security Practioner, i will push for end to end encryption but i willl like to understand this other point of view from AWS that, when reading it might suggest that the encryption between the load balancer and the EC2 is optional. I am in security now but my background is sysadmin and when i talk to operations people i dont like to just "impose" security regulations/standards/policies etc ... I like to explain why its required from a technical security point of view. When it comes to our on-prem applications ... its easy to explain the risks. But in AWS its a little bit confusing for me to justify my point when they show me AWS documentation stating that it might be enough just by encrypting the front end part of the communications.

1 Answer

Similar question was answered in this re:Post thread

profile picture
answered 2 months ago

You are not logged in. Log in to post an answer.

A good answer clearly answers the question and provides constructive feedback and encourages professional growth in the question asker.

Guidelines for Answering Questions