If I understand right from Apply Pod Security Standards at the Cluster Level, in order to have a PSS (Pod Security Standard) as default for the whole cluster I need to create an AdmissionConfiguration in a file that the API server needs to consume during cluster creation.
I don't see any way to configure / provide the AdmissionConfiguration at CreateCluster , also I'm not sure how to provide this AdmissionConfiguration in a managed EKS node.
From the tutorials that use KinD or minikube it seems that the AdmissionConfiguration must be in a file that is referenced in the cluster-config.yaml, but if I'm not mistaken the EKS API server is managed and does not allow to change or even see this file.
The GitHub issue aws/container-roadmap Allow Access to AdmissionConfiguration seems to suggest that currently there is no possibility of providing AdmissionConfiguration at creation, but on the other hand aws-eks-best-practices says These exemptions are applied statically in the PSA admission controller configuration as part of the API server configuration
so, is there a way to provide PodSecurityConfiguration for the whole cluster in EKS? or I'm forced to just use per-namespace labels?
See also Enforce Pod Security Standards by Configuration the Built-in Admission Controller and EKS Best practices PSS and PSA
I don't think there is any way currently in EKS to provide configuration for the built-in PSA controller (Pod Security Admission controller).
But if you want to implement a cluster-wide default for PSS (Pod Security Standards) you can do that by installing the the official pod-security-webhook as a Dynamic Admission Controller in EKS.
git clone https://github.com/kubernetes/pod-security-admission
cd pod-security-admission/webhook
make certs
kubectl apply -k .
The default podsecurityconfiguration.yaml in pod-security-admission/webhook/manifests/020-configmap.yaml allows EVERYTHING so you should edit it and write something like
apiVersion: v1
kind: ConfigMap
metadata:
name: pod-security-webhook
namespace: pod-security-webhook
data:
podsecurityconfiguration.yaml: |
apiVersion: pod-security.admission.config.k8s.io/v1beta1
kind: PodSecurityConfiguration
defaults:
enforce: "restricted"
enforce-version: "latest"
audit: "restricted"
audit-version: "latest"
warn: "restricted"
warn-version: "latest"
exemptions:
# Array of authenticated usernames to exempt.
usernames: []
# Array of runtime class names to exempt.
runtimeClasses: []
# Array of namespaces to exempt.
namespaces: ["policy-test2"]
then
kubectl apply -k .
kubectl -n pod-security-webhook rollout restart deployment/pod-security-webhook # otherwise the pods won't reread the configuration changes
After those changes you can verify that the default forbids privileged pods with:
kubectl --context aihub-eks-terraform create ns policy-test1
kubectl --context aihub-eks-terraform -n policy-test1 run --image=ecerulm/ubuntu-tools:latest --rm -ti rubelagu-$RANDOM --privileged
Error from server (Forbidden): admission webhook "pod-security-webhook.kubernetes.io" denied the request: pods "rubelagu-32081" is forbidden: violates PodSecurity "restricted:latest": privileged (container "rubelagu-32081" must not set securityContext.privileged=true), allowPrivilegeEscalation != false (container "rubelagu-32081" must set securityContext.allowPrivilegeEscalation=false), unrestricted capabilities (container "rubelagu-32081" must set securityContext.capabilities.drop=["ALL"]), runAsNonRoot != true (pod or container "rubelagu-32081" must set securityContext.runAsNonRoot=true), seccompProfile (pod or container "rubelagu-32081" must set securityContext.seccompProfile.type to "RuntimeDefault" or "Localhost")
Note: that you get the error forbidding privileged pods even when the namespace policy-test1 has no label pod-security.kubernetes.io/enforce, so you know that this rule comes from the pod-security-webhook that we just installed and configured.
Now if you want to create a pod you will be forced to create in a way that complies with the restricted PSS, by specifying runAsNonRoot, seccompProfile.type and capabilities and For example:
apiVersion: v1
kind: Pod
metadata:
name: test-1
spec:
restartPolicy: Never
securityContext:
runAsNonRoot: true
runAsUser: 1000
runAsGroup: 3000
fsGroup: 2000
seccompProfile:
type: RuntimeDefault
containers:
- name: test
image: ecerulm/ubuntu-tools:latest
imagePullPolicy: Always
command: ["/bin/bash", "-c", "--", "sleep 900"]
securityContext:
privileged: false
allowPrivilegeEscalation: false
capabilities:
drop:
- ALL
Related
I have a rancher 2.6.67 server and RKE2 downstream cluster. The cluster was created without authorized cluster endpoint. How to add an authorised cluster endpoint to a RKE2 cluster created by Rancher article describes how to add it in an existing cluster, however although the answer looks promising, I still must miss some detail, because it does not work for me.
Here is what I did:
Created /var/lib/rancher/rke2/kube-api-authn-webhook.yaml file with contents:
apiVersion: v1
kind: Config
clusters:
- name: Default
cluster:
insecure-skip-tls-verify: true
server: http://127.0.0.1:6440/v1/authenticate
users:
- name: Default
user:
insecure-skip-tls-verify: true
current-context: webhook
contexts:
- name: webhook
context:
user: Default
cluster: Default
and added
"kube-apiserver-arg": [
"authentication-token-webhook-config-file=/var/lib/rancher/rke2/kube-api-authn-webhook.yaml"
to the /etc/rancher/rke2/config.yaml.d/50-rancher.yaml file.
After restarting rke2-server I found the network configuration tab in Rancher and was able to enable authorized endpoint. Here is where my success ends.
I tried to create a serviceaccount and got the secret to have token authorization, but it failed when connecting directly to the api endpoint on the master.
kube-api-auth pod logs this:
time="2022-10-06T08:42:27Z" level=error msg="found 1 parts of token"
time="2022-10-06T08:42:27Z" level=info msg="Processing v1Authenticate request..."
Also the log is full of messages like this:
E1006 09:04:07.868108 1 reflector.go:139] pkg/mod/github.com/rancher/client-go#v1.22.3-rancher.1/tools/cache/reflector.go:168: Failed to watch *v3.ClusterAuthToken: failed to list *v3.ClusterAuthToken: the server could not find the requested resource (get clusterauthtokens.meta.k8s.io)
E1006 09:04:40.778350 1 reflector.go:139] pkg/mod/github.com/rancher/client-go#v1.22.3-rancher.1/tools/cache/reflector.go:168: Failed to watch *v3.ClusterAuthToken: failed to list *v3.ClusterAuthToken: the server could not find the requested resource (get clusterauthtokens.meta.k8s.io)
E1006 09:04:45.171554 1 reflector.go:139] pkg/mod/github.com/rancher/client-go#v1.22.3-rancher.1/tools/cache/reflector.go:168: Failed to watch *v3.ClusterUserAttribute: failed to list *v3.ClusterUserAttribute: the server could not find the requested resource (get clusteruserattributes.meta.k8s.io)
I found that SA tokens will not work this way so I tried to use a rancher user token, but that fails as well:
time="2022-10-06T08:37:34Z" level=info msg=" ...looking up token for kubeconfig-user-qq9nrc86vv"
time="2022-10-06T08:37:34Z" level=error msg="clusterauthtokens.cluster.cattle.io \"cattle-system/kubeconfig-user-qq9nrc86vv\" not found"
Checking the cattle-system namespace, there are no SA and secret entries corresponding to the users created in rancher, however I found SA and secret entries related in cattle-impersonation-system.
I tried creating a new user, but that too, only resulted in new entries in cattle-impersonation-system namespace, so I presume kube-api-auth wrongly assumes the location of the secrets to be cattle-system namespace.
Now the questions:
Can I authenticate with downstream RKE2 cluster using normal SA tokens (not ones created through Rancher server)? If so, how?
What did I do wrong about adding the webhook authentication configuration? How to make it work?
I noticed, that since I made the modifications described above, I cannot download the kubeconfig file from the rancher UI for this cluster. What went wrong there?
Thanks in advance for any advice.
I'm new to Kubernetes, and am playing with eksctl to create an EKS cluster in AWS. Here's my simple manifest file
kind: ClusterConfig
apiVersion: eksctl.io/v1alpha5
metadata:
name: sandbox
region: us-east-1
version: "1.18"
managedNodeGroups:
- name: ng-sandbox
instanceType: r5a.xlarge
privateNetworking: true
desiredCapacity: 2
minSize: 1
maxSize: 4
ssh:
allow: true
publicKeyName: my-ssh-key
fargateProfiles:
- name: fp-default
selectors:
# All workloads in the "default" Kubernetes namespace will be
# scheduled onto Fargate:
- namespace: default
# All workloads in the "kube-system" Kubernetes namespace will be
# scheduled onto Fargate:
- namespace: kube-system
- name: fp-sandbox
selectors:
# All workloads in the "sandbox" Kubernetes namespace matching the
# following label selectors will be scheduled onto Fargate:
- namespace: sandbox
labels:
env: sandbox
checks: passed
I created 2 roles, EKSClusterRole for cluster management, and EKSWorkerRole for the worker nodes? Where do I use them in the file? I'm looking at eksctl Config file schema page and it's not clear to me where in manifest file to use them.
As you mentioned, it's in the managedNodeGroups docs
managedNodeGroups:
- ...
iam:
instanceRoleARN: my-role-arn
# or
# instanceRoleName: my-role-name
You should also read about
Creating a cluster with Fargate support using a config file
AWS Fargate
i'm trying to use istio end-user authentication example with latest rancher, but I'm getting below error
unable to recognize "STDIN": no matches for kind "RequestAuthentication" in version "security.istio.io/v1beta1"
when I use below command
kubectl apply -f - <<EOF
apiVersion: "security.istio.io/v1beta1"
kind: "RequestAuthentication"
metadata:
name: "jwt-example"
namespace: foo
spec:
selector:
matchLabels:
app: httpbin
jwtRules:
- issuer: "testing#secure.istio.io"
jwksUri: "https://raw.githubusercontent.com/istio/istio/release-1.6/security/tools/jwt/samples/jwks.json"
EOF
According to this support matrix from rancher website,the istio version given is 1.4.7.
RequestAuthentication kind was introduced in istio in the version 1.5.So you might be applying the incorrect resource in this version.See this for istio's upgrade notes on 1.5.Since rancher is having not the latest version ,you will have to apply the old policy resources.You can find 1.4 docs at https://archive.istio.io/v1.4/docs/
Hope this helps.
I'm trying to apply rate limiting on some of our internal services (inside the mesh).
I used the example from the docs and generated redis rate limiting configurations that include a (redis) handler, quota instance, quota spec, quota spec binding and rule to apply the handler.
This redis handler:
apiVersion: config.istio.io/v1alpha2
kind: handler
metadata:
name: redishandler
namespace: istio-system
spec:
compiledAdapter: redisquota
params:
redisServerUrl: <REDIS>:6379
connectionPoolSize: 10
quotas:
- name: requestcountquota.instance.istio-system
maxAmount: 10
validDuration: 100s
rateLimitAlgorithm: FIXED_WINDOW
overrides:
- dimensions:
destination: s1
maxAmount: 1
- dimensions:
destination: s3
maxAmount: 1
- dimensions:
destination: s2
maxAmount: 1
The quota instance (I'm only interested in limiting by destination at the moment):
apiVersion: config.istio.io/v1alpha2
kind: instance
metadata:
name: requestcountquota
namespace: istio-system
spec:
compiledTemplate: quota
params:
dimensions:
destination: destination.labels["app"] | destination.service.host | "unknown"
A quota spec, charging 1 per request if I understand correctly:
apiVersion: config.istio.io/v1alpha2
kind: QuotaSpec
metadata:
name: request-count
namespace: istio-system
spec:
rules:
- quotas:
- charge: 1
quota: requestcountquota
A quota binding spec that all participating services pre-fetch. I also tried with service: "*" which also did nothing.
apiVersion: config.istio.io/v1alpha2
kind: QuotaSpecBinding
metadata:
name: request-count
namespace: istio-system
spec:
quotaSpecs:
- name: request-count
namespace: istio-system
services:
- name: s2
namespace: default
- name: s3
namespace: default
- name: s1
namespace: default
# - service: '*' # Uncomment this to bind *all* services to request-count
A rule to apply the handler. Currently on all occasions (tried with matches but didn't change anything as well):
apiVersion: config.istio.io/v1alpha2
kind: rule
metadata:
name: quota
namespace: istio-system
spec:
actions:
- handler: redishandler
instances:
- requestcountquota
The VirtualService definitions are pretty similar for all participants:
apiVersion: networking.istio.io/v1alpha3
kind: VirtualService
metadata:
name: s1
spec:
hosts:
- s1
http:
- route:
- destination:
host: s1
The problem is nothing really happens and no rate limiting takes place. I tested with curl from pods inside the mesh. The redis instance is empty (no keys on db 0, which I assume is what the rate limiting would use) so I know it can't practically rate-limit anything.
The handler seems to be configured properly (how can I make sure?) because I had some errors in it which were reported in mixer (policy). There are still some errors but none which I associate to this problem or the configuration. The only line in which redis handler is mentioned is this:
2019-12-17T13:44:22.958041Z info adapters adapter closed all scheduled daemons and workers {"adapter": "redishandler.istio-system"}
But its unclear if its a problem or not. I assume its not.
These are the rest of the lines from the reload once I deploy:
2019-12-17T13:44:22.601644Z info Built new config.Snapshot: id='43'
2019-12-17T13:44:22.601866Z info adapters getting kubeconfig from: "" {"adapter": "kubernetesenv.istio-system"}
2019-12-17T13:44:22.601881Z warn Neither --kubeconfig nor --master was specified. Using the inClusterConfig. This might not work.
2019-12-17T13:44:22.602718Z info adapters Waiting for kubernetes cache sync... {"adapter": "kubernetesenv.istio-system"}
2019-12-17T13:44:22.903844Z info adapters Cache sync successful. {"adapter": "kubernetesenv.istio-system"}
2019-12-17T13:44:22.903878Z info adapters getting kubeconfig from: "" {"adapter": "kubernetesenv.istio-system"}
2019-12-17T13:44:22.903882Z warn Neither --kubeconfig nor --master was specified. Using the inClusterConfig. This might not work.
2019-12-17T13:44:22.904808Z info Setting up event handlers
2019-12-17T13:44:22.904939Z info Starting Secrets controller
2019-12-17T13:44:22.904991Z info Waiting for informer caches to sync
2019-12-17T13:44:22.957893Z info Cleaning up handler table, with config ID:42
2019-12-17T13:44:22.957924Z info adapters deleted remote controller {"adapter": "kubernetesenv.istio-system"}
2019-12-17T13:44:22.957999Z info adapters adapter closed all scheduled daemons and workers {"adapter": "prometheus.istio-system"}
2019-12-17T13:44:22.958041Z info adapters adapter closed all scheduled daemons and workers {"adapter": "redishandler.istio-system"}
2019-12-17T13:44:22.958065Z info adapters shutting down daemon... {"adapter": "kubernetesenv.istio-system"}
2019-12-17T13:44:22.958050Z info adapters shutting down daemon... {"adapter": "kubernetesenv.istio-system"}
2019-12-17T13:44:22.958096Z info adapters shutting down daemon... {"adapter": "kubernetesenv.istio-system"}
2019-12-17T13:44:22.958182Z info adapters shutting down daemon... {"adapter": "kubernetesenv.istio-system"}
2019-12-17T13:44:23.958109Z info adapters adapter closed all scheduled daemons and workers {"adapter": "kubernetesenv.istio-system"}
2019-12-17T13:55:21.042131Z info transport: loopyWriter.run returning. connection error: desc = "transport is closing"
2019-12-17T14:14:00.265722Z info transport: loopyWriter.run returning. connection error: desc = "transport is closing"
I'm using the demo profile with disablePolicyChecks: false to enable rate limiting. This is on istio 1.4.0, deployed on EKS.
I also tried memquota (this is our staging environment) with low limits and nothing seems to work. I never got a 429 no matter how much I went over the rate limit configured.
I don't know how to debug this and see where the configuration is wrong causing it to do nothing.
Any help is appreciated.
I too spent hours trying to decipher the documentation and get a sample working.
According to the documentation, they recommended that we enable policy checks:
https://istio.io/docs/tasks/policy-enforcement/rate-limiting/
However when that did not work, I did an "istioctl profile dump", searched for policy, and tried several settings.
I used Helm install and passed the following and then was able to get the described behaviour:
--set global.disablePolicyChecks=false \
--set values.pilot.policy.enabled=true \ ===> this made it work, but it's not in the docs.
I am trying to run a Redis cluster in Kubernetes in DigitalOcean.
As a poc, I simply tried running an example I found online (https://github.com/sanderploegsma/redis-cluster/blob/master/redis-cluster.yml), which is able to spin up the pods appropriately when running locally using minikube.
However, when running it on Digital Ocean, I always get the following error:
Warning FailedScheduling 3s (x8 over 17s) default-scheduler pod has unbound immediate PersistentVolumeClaims (repeated 4 times)
Given that I am not changing anything, I am not sure why this would not work. Does anyone have any suggestions?
EDIT: some additional info
$ kubectl describe pvc
Name: data-redis-cluster-0
Namespace: default
StorageClass:
Status: Pending
Volume:
Labels: app=redis-cluster
Annotations: <none>
Finalizers: [kubernetes.io/pvc-protection]
Capacity:
Access Modes:
Events:
Type Reason Age From Message
---- ------ ---- ---- -------
Normal FailedBinding 3m19s (x3420 over 14h) persistentvolume-controller no persistent volumes available for this claim and no storage class is set
Mounted By: <none>
EDIT: setting the default storage class partially resolved the problem!
However, the node is now not able to find available volumes to bind:
kubectl describe pvc:
Name: data-redis-cluster-0
Namespace: default
StorageClass: local-storage
Status: Pending
Volume:
Labels: app=redis-cluster
Annotations: <none>
Finalizers: [kubernetes.io/pvc-protection]
Capacity:
Access Modes:
Events:
Type Reason Age From Message
---- ------ ---- ---- -------
Normal WaitForFirstConsumer 12m (x9 over 13m) persistentvolume-controller waiting for first consumer to be created before binding
Normal WaitForFirstConsumer 3m19s (x26 over 9m34s) persistentvolume-controller waiting for first consumer to be created before binding
kubectl describe pod redis-cluster-0
....
Events:
Type Reason Age From Message
---- ------ ---- ---- -------
Warning FailedScheduling 16m (x25 over 17m) default-scheduler 0/5 nodes are available: 1 node(s) had taints that the pod didn't tolerate, 4 node(s) didn't find available persistent volumes to bind.
kubectl describe sc
Name: local-storage
IsDefaultClass: Yes
Annotations: storageclass.kubernetes.io/is-default-class=true
Provisioner: kubernetes.io/no-provisioner
Parameters: <none>
AllowVolumeExpansion: <unset>
MountOptions: <none>
ReclaimPolicy: Delete
VolumeBindingMode: WaitForFirstConsumer
Events: <none>
kubernetes manager pod logs:
I1028 15:30:56.154131 1 event.go:221] Event(v1.ObjectReference{Kind:"StatefulSet", Namespace:"default", Name:"redis-cluster", UID:"7528483e-dac6-11e8-871f-2e55450d570e", APIVersion:"apps/v1", ResourceVersion:"2588806", FieldPath:""}): type: 'Normal' reason: 'SuccessfulCreate' create Claim data-redis-cluster-0 Pod redis-cluster-0 in StatefulSet redis-cluster success
I1028 15:30:56.166649 1 event.go:221] Event(v1.ObjectReference{Kind:"PersistentVolumeClaim", Namespace:"default", Name:"data-redis-cluster-0", UID:"76746506-dac6-11e8-871f-2e55450d570e", APIVersion:"v1", ResourceVersion:"2588816", FieldPath:""}): type: 'Normal' reason: 'WaitForFirstConsumer' waiting for first consumer to be created before binding
I1028 15:30:56.220464 1 event.go:221] Event(v1.ObjectReference{Kind:"StatefulSet", Namespace:"default", Name:"redis-cluster", UID:"7528483e-dac6-11e8-871f-2e55450d570e", APIVersion:"apps/v1", ResourceVersion:"2588806", FieldPath:""}): type: 'Normal' reason: 'SuccessfulCreate' create Pod redis-cluster-0 in StatefulSet redis-cluster successful
I1028 15:30:57.004631 1 event.go:221] Event(v1.ObjectReference{Kind:"PersistentVolumeClaim", Namespace:"default", Name:"data-redis-cluster-0", UID:"76746506-dac6-11e8-871f-2e55450d570e", APIVersion:"v1", ResourceVersion:"2588825", FieldPath:""}): type: 'Normal' reason: 'WaitForFirstConsumer' waiting for first consumer to be created before binding
This:
no storage class is set
And an empty output for kubectl describe sc means that there's no storage class.
I recommend installing the CSI-driver for Digital Ocean. That will create a do-block-storage class using the Kubernetes CSI interface.
Another option is to use local storage. Using a local storage class:
$ cat <<EOF
kind: StorageClass
apiVersion: storage.k8s.io/v1
metadata:
name: local-storage
provisioner: kubernetes.io/no-provisioner
volumeBindingMode: WaitForFirstConsumer
EOF | kubectl apply -f -
Then for either case you may need to set it as a default storage class if you don't specify storageClassName in your PVC:
$ kubectl patch storageclass local-storage -p '{"metadata": {"annotations":{"storageclass.kubernetes.io/is-default-class":"true"}}}'
or
$ kubectl patch storageclass do-block-storage -p '{"metadata": {"annotations":{"storageclass.kubernetes.io/is-default-class":"true"}}}'
It is a statefulSet using PersistentVolumeClaims
You need to configure a default storageClass in your cluster so that the PersistentVolumeClaim can take the storage from there.
In minikube one is already available so it succeeds without error:
C02W84XMHTD5:ucp iahmad$ kubectl get sc --all-namespaces
NAME PROVISIONER AGE
standard (default) k8s.io/minikube-hostpath 7d