[mlmitch]

The complicated stuff seems predicated on this:

“However, the S3 website endpoint is publicly available. Anyone who knows this endpoint can therefore also request your content while bypassing CloudFront. If both URLs are crawled by Google, you risk getting a penalty for duplicate content.”

I’m curious if anyone has experienced these issues in practice.

[tyingq]

You can specify the canonical url in the HTML. Then it's not an issue.

https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/139066?hl=en

[lawik]

I run the setup of S3 + Cloudfront and never ran into their index problem because I'm not trying for URLs without document file extensions.

I assume that's the reason for really wanting index redirect in directories. Pretty URLs, I didn't feel the need. There are other valid reasons too I'm sure. But my needs diverged from the article even earlier than SEO penalties.

[mlmitch]

The pretty URLs thing is confusing me now too. AWS lets you configure the buckets to do the pretty URLs.

https://docs.aws.amazon.com/AmazonS3/latest/dev/HowDoIWebsit... https://docs.aws.amazon.com/AmazonS3/latest/dev/IndexDocumen...

I put up a Jekyll site on s3/cloudfront recently and it seems to work well.

Anyway, I’m still wondering about the consequences of the naked s3 endpoint being available.