AWS Secrets Manager vs Docker Secrets: What are the differences?

Introduction

In this article, we will explore the key differences between AWS Secrets Manager and Docker Secrets. Both AWS Secrets Manager and Docker Secrets are tools that help manage and secure sensitive information, such as passwords, API keys, and database credentials, within an application environment. However, there are several important distinctions between the two.

1. Integration with Environment: AWS Secrets Manager is specifically designed to work with AWS environments and services. It seamlessly integrates with other AWS services like AWS Lambda, RDS, and EC2, allowing applications to securely access secrets stored in the AWS Secrets Manager. On the other hand, Docker Secrets is focused on integrating with Docker Swarm, a container orchestration platform. Docker Secrets provide an easy way to securely manage and distribute secrets within a Docker Swarm cluster.

2. Granularity of Secrets: AWS Secrets Manager allows you to store individual secrets as key-value pairs. This means you can store multiple secrets within a single secret name. Secrets are versioned, and you can retrieve a specific version or the latest version as needed. In contrast, Docker Secrets stores a single secret value per secret name. Each secret is mounted into the corresponding service and can be accessed within the container without knowing the underlying secret value. Docker Secrets do not have versioning; whenever a secret value is updated, it is automatically propagated to the services using it.

3. Visibility and Management: AWS Secrets Manager provides a centralized management console that allows administrators to create, manage, and rotate secrets easily. It provides fine-grained access control for secrets and allows auditing of all secret access and updates. Additionally, Secrets Manager can automatically rotate secrets to enhance security. Docker Secrets, on the other hand, are managed locally within a Docker Swarm cluster. The secrets are stored encrypted at rest within the swarm, and access is handled through the Docker API. Docker Secrets lack a dedicated management interface and do not provide built-in rotation capabilities.

4. Integration with Third-Party Services: AWS Secrets Manager has built-in integrations with various AWS services, ensuring seamless secret access management for those services. It can automatically update secrets for services like Amazon RDS and Amazon DocumentDB, without application code changes. Docker Secrets, being more container-centric, does not have direct integrations with third-party services. However, using the Docker Secrets API, applications running within containers can fetch the secret value from the swarm and use it to connect with external services.

5. Scalability and Availability: AWS Secrets Manager is a managed service, ensuring high availability, scalability, and durability of secrets. Secrets are replicated across multiple availability zones within a region, providing fault tolerance and ensuring high availability. Docker Secrets, being managed within a Docker Swarm cluster, relies on the fault tolerance and scalability features of the swarm. In the event of failure in a swarm node, the secrets are automatically redistributed to other healthy nodes.

6. Vendor Lock-In: AWS Secrets Manager is an AWS-specific service, which means it ties you to the AWS ecosystem. If your application needs to be migrated to a different cloud provider or on-premises environment, you may need to refactor code that accesses secrets stored in AWS Secrets Manager. Docker Secrets, on the other hand, provide a more portable solution as they are not specific to any cloud provider. You can use Docker Secrets in any Docker Swarm environment, regardless of the underlying infrastructure provider.

Summary:

In summary, AWS Secrets Manager and Docker Secrets differ in their integration capabilities, granularity of secrets, visibility and management options, integration with third-party services, scalability and availability features, and vendor lock-in implications. The choice between the two depends on the specific application's requirements, the underlying infrastructure, and the need for cloud provider independence.