Merge pull request #44311 from apeabody/patch-1
consistency updates for pod security standards documentation
This commit is contained in:
commit
856df61cb3
|
@ -29,9 +29,9 @@ This guide outlines the requirements of each policy.
|
|||
**The _Privileged_ policy is purposely-open, and entirely unrestricted.** This type of policy is
|
||||
typically aimed at system- and infrastructure-level workloads managed by privileged, trusted users.
|
||||
|
||||
The Privileged policy is defined by an absence of restrictions. Allow-by-default
|
||||
mechanisms (such as gatekeeper) may be Privileged by default. In contrast, for a deny-by-default mechanism (such as Pod
|
||||
Security Policy) the Privileged policy should disable all restrictions.
|
||||
The Privileged policy is defined by an absence of restrictions. If you define a Pod where the Privileged
|
||||
security policy applies, the Pod you define is able to bypass typical container isolation mechanisms.
|
||||
For example, you can define a Pod that has access to the node's host network.
|
||||
|
||||
### Baseline
|
||||
|
||||
|
@ -57,7 +57,7 @@ fail validation.
|
|||
<tr>
|
||||
<td style="white-space: nowrap">HostProcess</td>
|
||||
<td>
|
||||
<p>Windows pods offer the ability to run <a href="/docs/tasks/configure-pod-container/create-hostprocess-pod">HostProcess containers</a> which enables privileged access to the Windows node. Privileged access to the host is disallowed in the baseline policy. {{< feature-state for_k8s_version="v1.26" state="stable" >}}</p>
|
||||
<p>Windows Pods offer the ability to run <a href="/docs/tasks/configure-pod-container/create-hostprocess-pod">HostProcess containers</a> which enables privileged access to the Windows host machine. Privileged access to the host is disallowed in the Baseline policy. {{< feature-state for_k8s_version="v1.26" state="stable" >}}</p>
|
||||
<p><strong>Restricted Fields</strong></p>
|
||||
<ul>
|
||||
<li><code>spec.securityContext.windowsOptions.hostProcess</code></li>
|
||||
|
@ -317,12 +317,12 @@ fail validation.
|
|||
<td><strong>Policy</strong></td>
|
||||
</tr>
|
||||
<tr>
|
||||
<td colspan="2"><em>Everything from the baseline profile.</em></td>
|
||||
<td colspan="2"><em>Everything from the Baseline policy</em></td>
|
||||
</tr>
|
||||
<tr>
|
||||
<td style="white-space: nowrap">Volume Types</td>
|
||||
<td>
|
||||
<p>The restricted policy only permits the following volume types.</p>
|
||||
<p>The Restricted policy only permits the following volume types.</p>
|
||||
<p><strong>Restricted Fields</strong></p>
|
||||
<ul>
|
||||
<li><code>spec.volumes[*]</code></li>
|
||||
|
@ -488,15 +488,14 @@ workloads. Specifically, many of the Pod `securityContext` fields
|
|||
[have no effect on Windows](/docs/concepts/windows/intro/#compatibility-v1-pod-spec-containers-securitycontext).
|
||||
|
||||
{{< note >}}
|
||||
Kubelets prior to v1.24 don't enforce the pod OS field, and if a cluster has nodes on versions earlier than v1.24 the restricted policies should be pinned to a version prior to v1.25.
|
||||
Kubelets prior to v1.24 don't enforce the pod OS field, and if a cluster has nodes on versions earlier than v1.24 the Restricted policies should be pinned to a version prior to v1.25.
|
||||
{{< /note >}}
|
||||
|
||||
### Restricted Pod Security Standard changes
|
||||
Another important change, made in Kubernetes v1.25 is that the _restricted_ Pod security
|
||||
Another important change, made in Kubernetes v1.25 is that the _Restricted_ policy
|
||||
has been updated to use the `pod.spec.os.name` field. Based on the OS name, certain policies that are specific
|
||||
to a particular OS can be relaxed for the other OS.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
#### OS-specific policy controls
|
||||
Restrictions on the following controls are only required if `.spec.os.name` is not `windows`:
|
||||
- Privilege Escalation
|
||||
|
@ -511,10 +510,10 @@ the [documentation](/docs/concepts/workloads/pods/user-namespaces#integration-wi
|
|||
|
||||
## FAQ
|
||||
|
||||
### Why isn't there a profile between privileged and baseline?
|
||||
### Why isn't there a profile between Privileged and Baseline?
|
||||
|
||||
The three profiles defined here have a clear linear progression from most secure (restricted) to least
|
||||
secure (privileged), and cover a broad set of workloads. Privileges required above the baseline
|
||||
The three profiles defined here have a clear linear progression from most secure (Restricted) to least
|
||||
secure (Privileged), and cover a broad set of workloads. Privileges required above the Baseline
|
||||
policy are typically very application specific, so we do not offer a standard profile in this
|
||||
niche. This is not to say that the privileged profile should always be used in this case, but that
|
||||
policies in this space need to be defined on a case-by-case basis.
|
||||
|
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue