Skip to content
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

[Feature] Consider Adding the Feature to Dynamically Remove BPF Enforcer #99

Open
Danny-Wei opened this issue Jul 4, 2024 · 0 comments · May be fixed by #100
Open

[Feature] Consider Adding the Feature to Dynamically Remove BPF Enforcer #99

Danny-Wei opened this issue Jul 4, 2024 · 0 comments · May be fixed by #100
Labels
enhancement New feature or request

Comments

@Danny-Wei
Copy link
Member

Danny-Wei commented Jul 4, 2024

Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
We should consider supporting the dynamic removal of the BPF enforcer. This would help provide more intervention methods to mitigate issues like #97.

Describe the solution you'd like
Starting from v0.5.9, vArmor supports dynamically adding enforcers to policies. This allows users to enable corresponding enforcer's rules for new workloads without needing to recreate policies, while not affecting the existing workloads.

Considering the particularities of AppArmor & Seccomp enforcers, vArmor does not allow users to dynamically remove enforcers, as this would impact the existing workloads (especially those pods created by an operator). However, the BPF enforcer is not subject to this restriction. We should consider supporting users to update the existing policies to remove the BPF enforcer.

Describe alternatives you've considered
Of course, people can still mitigate similar issues by switching the policy to AlwaysAllow mode.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

1 participant