Add S3 Bucket and Object Key to S3 instrumentation (OTel)

[david-luna]

Updated the AWS S3 Spec by adding Bucket and Object Key into OpenTelemetry attributes (otel)

• May the instrumentation collect sensitive information, such as secrets or PII (ex. in headers)?
  • Yes
    • Add a section to the spec how agents should apply sanitization (such as sanitize_field_names)
  • No
    • Why? Bucket and Object Key does not hold personal information
  • n/a
• Create PR as draft
• Approval by at least one other agent
• Mark as Ready for Review (automatically requests reviews from all agents and PM via CODEOWNERS)
  • Remove PM from reviewers if impact on product is negligible
  • Remove agents from reviewers if the change is not relevant for them
• Approved by at least 2 agents + PM (if relevant)
• Merge after 7 days passed without objections
  To auto-merge the PR, add /schedule YYYY-MM-DD to the PR description.
• Create implementation issues through the meta issue template (this will automate issue creation for individual agents)
• If this spec adds a new dynamic config option, add it to central config.

Closes: #760

[trentm]

@AlexanderWert, others: Do you think we should consider also adding otel.attributes["aws.s3.bucket"] et al for Lambda transactions that are S3-triggered? (https://github.com/elastic/apm/blob/main/specs/agents/tracing-instrumentation-aws-lambda.md#s3)

[AlexanderWert]

@AlexanderWert, others: Do you think we should consider also adding otel.attributes["aws.s3.bucket"] et al for Lambda transactions that are S3-triggered? (https://github.com/elastic/apm/blob/main/specs/agents/tracing-instrumentation-aws-lambda.md#s3)

Good point @trentm! Yes, I think that makes sense.

[gregkalapos]

LGTM (once #788 (comment) is merged).

[david-luna]

@AlexanderWert, others: Do you think we should consider also adding otel.attributes["aws.s3.bucket"] et al for Lambda transactions that are S3-triggered? (https://github.com/elastic/apm/blob/main/specs/agents/tracing-instrumentation-aws-lambda.md#s3)

Good point @trentm! Yes, I think that makes sense.

I'd prefer to have it separately. I'll create a spec issue and one for the agents that may implement it.

[AlexanderWert]

LGTM (just added a minor syntactical proposal to make it consistent)