-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 862
feat: enforce kind on admission review #2512
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.
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
maxsmythe
merged 3 commits into
open-policy-agent:master
from
acpana:acpana/enforce-kind
Jan 18, 2023
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Do we want to emulate real admission requests for the DELETE operation such that
object is the new object being admitted.
It is null for DELETE operations.
https://kubernetes.io/docs/reference/access-authn-authz/extensible-admission-controllers/#webhook-request-and-response
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
When I print
input.review.objectin the rego after runningkubectl deleteI definitely see the object and it is not null. This was on a k8s v1.25 cluster. Not sure if the doc is old because the behavior is updated but this was definitely the case before. #144 (comment) very strange.Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Hm, this is interesting. We specifically decided to overwrite the
Objectwhen I/ we worked on this: https://github.com/open-policy-agent/gatekeeper/blob/master/pkg/util/request_validation.go#L15-L32 which was what g8r was doing before too:gatekeeper/pkg/webhook/policy.go
Lines 148 to 152 in 149fb90
If we did want to change things around here, I'd be open to opening a new issue and tackling this in a new PR. Just want to keep this one's scope small to
kindenforcement. Would that be ok?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LOL looks like I added this in 2019 #146 so it is a GK specific behavior. So for gator, we can assume
objectis not null then?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
IMO the input should match what we expect to receive from the API server (meaning an appropriate test would show object as nil and gator should handle the rewriting to make object == oldObject).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
could I handle this in a followup PR?