You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
{{ message }}
Repository navigation
security(k8s): decide how vendored upstream bundles carry checkov dispositions (16 findings, 43% of #2787)Β #2899
Both are multi-document upstream release manifests (~5.8k lines for CDI), and git log shows exactly one commit each β 61885392 feat: add KubeVirt and CDI operators to platform β so
neither has ever been hand-edited. The repo already treats them as vendored: cdi/kustomization.yaml
adjusts them through kustomize patches: rather than editing the file.
Problem
The two mechanisms this backlog has used so far both fail here:
A kustomize patch does not help, because checkov scans the file on disk, not the rendered
output.
--skip-path would work mechanically but is far too broad β it would drop every check on both
files, not the eight that are genuinely upstream's.
Worth deciding
Which of these is the durable convention for vendored upstream manifests, given the platform
vendors more of them over time:
Regenerate with a documented fetch step that appends the dispositions, so a bump reproduces
them instead of dropping them.
Move the bundles behind a HelmRelease or OCI source so they are not files in the tree at all
β the coredns deployment already carries a TODO: Rework ... into a helm-release for the same
reason.
A path-and-check-scoped exclusion expressed once, if checkov can express it without
suppressing unrelated checks on the same path.
The answer decides how ~43% of #2787's remaining backlog is closed, so it is worth settling before
dispositioning the eight checks individually.
Acceptance criteria
A convention is recorded for vendored upstream manifests, with its rationale.
It survives a vendor bump β a bump does not silently reintroduce the sixteen findings.
It does not suppress checks that are genuinely ours on those paths.
Applied to both bundles; checkov's kubernetes framework drops accordingly.
Rough size: medium β the decision is the work; applying it is small. Part of #2787.
Activity
security(k8s): disposition CKV_K8S_40 where the UID is load-bearing
docs(ci): drop an over-strong RWO claim and fix the CoreDNS issue attβ¦