Skip to content

Commit bbd9feb

Browse files
authored
adding question
and answer after slack discussion 5/7
1 parent bb99ed2 commit bbd9feb

File tree

1 file changed

+6
-0
lines changed
  • sig-security/security-audit-2021

1 file changed

+6
-0
lines changed

sig-security/security-audit-2021/RFP.md

Lines changed: 6 additions & 0 deletions
Original file line numberDiff line numberDiff line change
@@ -121,3 +121,9 @@ The audit should result in the following deliverables, which will be made public
121121
* Audited reference architecture specification. Should take the form of a summary and associated configuration YAML files.
122122
* Findings report including an executive summary.
123123
* Where possible and, in the vendor’s opinion makes the most judicious use of time, proof of concept exploits that the Kubernetes project can use to investigate and fix defects.
124+
125+
## Questions Asked during RFP Response Process
126+
127+
### Do we need to use our own hardware and infrastructure or should we use a cloud?
128+
129+
Strong preference would be for the vendor to provide their own infrastructure or use a public cloud provider, just NOT a managed offering like GKE or EKS. The reasoning is to prevent accidentally auditing a cloud provider's kubernetes service instead of kubernetes/kubernetes. Depending on the scope and approach, it may make sense to use a local cluster (e.g. kind) for API fuzzing and anything that doesn't impact the underlying OS, and is an easy to use repeatable setup (see Methodology above).

0 commit comments

Comments
 (0)