Skip to content

Rewrite PodSecurityPolicy guide #6378

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Dec 2, 2017
Merged

Rewrite PodSecurityPolicy guide #6378

Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
9 changes: 3 additions & 6 deletions docs/concepts/policy/psp.yaml → docs/concepts/policy/example-psp.yaml
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -1,8 +1,10 @@
apiVersion: extensions/v1beta1
kind: PodSecurityPolicy
metadata:
name: permissive
name: example
spec:
privileged: false # Don't allow privileged pods!
# The rest fills in some required fields.
seLinux:
rule: RunAsAny
supplementalGroups:
Expand All @@ -11,10 +13,5 @@ spec:
rule: RunAsAny
fsGroup:
rule: RunAsAny
hostPorts:
- min: 8000
max: 8080
volumes:
- '*'
Copy link
Contributor

@php-coder php-coder Nov 22, 2017

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

That make it still permissive (as it allows hostPath volume type). Consider limiting the number of allowed types to fixed number (AFAIR we had a recommended list somewhere..)

Copy link
Member Author

@tallclair tallclair Nov 22, 2017

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I was trying to keep this policy as minimal as possible, just to demonstrate that it is being applied in the example. The restricted policy (restricted-psp.yaml) is the one that actually applies the recommended best practices.

Copy link
Member

@liggitt liggitt Nov 23, 2017

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

"unprivileged" still makes it sound like it will be restrictive... not sure a better name for what this does

Copy link
Member Author

@tallclair tallclair Nov 27, 2017

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Went with just "example".

allowedCapabilities:
- '*'
Loading