-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4.6k
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
adding a docker file and add k8s deployments manifest file #212
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
WalkthroughThe changes involve the complete removal of several key files related to a DevSecOps pipeline for a Node.js application, including the Jenkinsfile, README documentation, Docker Compose configurations, and Kustomize resources. Additionally, Kubernetes deployment configurations were removed, along with Terraform configurations for Docker resources and a SonarQube project properties file. Minor stylistic updates were also made to the user interface of the application. Changes
Sequence Diagram(s)sequenceDiagram
participant User
participant UI
participant Server
participant Database
User->>UI: Interacts with application
UI->>Server: Sends request
Server->>Database: Queries data
Database-->>Server: Returns data
Server-->>UI: Sends response
UI-->>User: Displays updated interface
📜 Recent review detailsConfiguration used: CodeRabbit UI 📒 Files selected for processing (6)
💤 Files with no reviewable changes (6)
Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media? 🪧 TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments. CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)
Other keywords and placeholders
CodeRabbit Configuration File (
|
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.
Actionable comments posted: 1
Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: ASSERTIVE
Files selected for processing (21)
- DevSecOps/Jenkinsfile (0 hunks)
- DevSecOps/README.md (0 hunks)
- Jenkinsfile (1 hunks)
- docker-compose.yaml (0 hunks)
- k8s/deployment.yml (2 hunks)
- k8s/pod.yml (1 hunks)
- k8s/replica-sets.yml (2 hunks)
- k8s/service.yml (1 hunks)
- kustomize/README.md (0 hunks)
- kustomize/base/app-1/app-1.yml (0 hunks)
- kustomize/base/app-1/kustomization.yml (0 hunks)
- kustomize/base/ingress/ingress.yml (0 hunks)
- kustomize/base/ingress/kustomization.yml (0 hunks)
- kustomize/overlays/dev/dev-ingress-patch.json (0 hunks)
- kustomize/overlays/dev/kustomization.yml (0 hunks)
- kustomize/overlays/prd/kustomization.yml (0 hunks)
- kustomize/overlays/prd/prd-ingress-patch.json (0 hunks)
- sonar-project.properties (0 hunks)
- terraform/main.tf (0 hunks)
- terraform/terraform.tf (0 hunks)
- views/todo.ejs (4 hunks)
Files not reviewed due to no reviewable changes (15)
- DevSecOps/Jenkinsfile
- DevSecOps/README.md
- docker-compose.yaml
- kustomize/README.md
- kustomize/base/app-1/app-1.yml
- kustomize/base/app-1/kustomization.yml
- kustomize/base/ingress/ingress.yml
- kustomize/base/ingress/kustomization.yml
- kustomize/overlays/dev/dev-ingress-patch.json
- kustomize/overlays/dev/kustomization.yml
- kustomize/overlays/prd/kustomization.yml
- kustomize/overlays/prd/prd-ingress-patch.json
- sonar-project.properties
- terraform/main.tf
- terraform/terraform.tf
Files skipped from review due to trivial changes (3)
- Jenkinsfile
- k8s/service.yml
- views/todo.ejs
Additional context used
yamllint
k8s/replica-sets.yml
[error] 22-22: wrong indentation: expected 8 but found 6
(indentation)
checkov
k8s/replica-sets.yml
[MEDIUM] 1-23: Containers should not run with allowPrivilegeEscalation
(CKV_K8S_20)
[MEDIUM] 1-23: Minimize the admission of root containers
(CKV_K8S_23)
Additional comments not posted (6)
k8s/pod.yml (2)
5-5
: Verify the namespace change.The namespace has been changed from
node-app
tonode155
. Please confirm if this change is intentional and aligns with the overall deployment strategy and cluster organization.Ensure that the
node155
namespace exists in the cluster before deploying this Pod configuration.
10-10
: Review the container image change and Dockerfile.The container image has been updated to
darshif5/simple-node-app:node-todo
. Please ensure that:
- The new image has been properly built, tested, and is compatible with the existing environment.
- The
node-todo
tag represents a stable and approved version of the application.- The Dockerfile follows best practices for building the image, such as using a specific base image version, minimizing the number of layers, and properly setting up the application.
Please provide the Dockerfile for review to ensure it aligns with the image change and follows best practices.
k8s/replica-sets.yml (1)
5-5
: Verify the namespace change across related resources and configurations.The namespace has been changed from
node-app
tonode155
. Ensure that this change is consistently applied across all related Kubernetes resources (e.g., Services, Deployments, ConfigMaps) and any external configurations that reference the namespace.Run the following script to verify the namespace usage:
Verification successful
Namespace change verified and consistently applied
The namespace change from 'node-app' to 'node155' has been successfully verified across all Kubernetes configuration files (.yml and .yaml). The following observations support this conclusion:
- No occurrences of the old namespace 'node-app' were found.
- The new namespace 'node155' is consistently used across multiple configuration files.
- 'node155' is the only namespace declaration present in the Kubernetes resource files.
This change has been implemented correctly and consistently, aligning with the intended modifications described in the PR objectives.
Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the namespace change across related resources and configurations. # Test 1: Search for the old namespace in Kubernetes resource files. Expect: No occurrences. fd --type yaml --exec rg $'node-app' # Test 2: Search for the new namespace in Kubernetes resource files. Expect: Consistent usage. fd --type yaml --exec rg $'node155'Length of output: 414
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the namespace change across related resources and configurations. # Test 1: Search for the old namespace in Kubernetes resource files. Expect: No occurrences. fd -e yml -e yaml -x rg -i 'namespace:\s*node-app' {} # Test 2: Search for the new namespace in Kubernetes resource files. Expect: Consistent usage. fd -e yml -e yaml -x rg -i 'namespace:\s*node155' {} # Test 3: List all unique namespace declarations in Kubernetes resource files. fd -e yml -e yaml -x rg -i 'namespace:' {} | sort | uniqLength of output: 353
k8s/deployment.yml (3)
16-16
: Skipped: Namespace change is consistent.This change is consistent with the namespace change in the deployment metadata. No further action is required as the namespace change has already been verified.
5-5
: Verify the namespace change.Ensure that the
node155
namespace exists and is intended for this deployment. Also, verify that the namespace change is consistently applied across all related Kubernetes resources to avoid deployment issues and resource isolation problems.Run the following script to verify the namespace change:
Verification successful
Namespace change verified and consistently applied
The namespace change from 'node-app' to 'node155' has been successfully verified. The new namespace 'node155' is consistently used across multiple Kubernetes resource files, including:
- k8s/deployment.yml
- k8s/pod.yml
- k8s/replica-sets.yml
- k8s/service.yml
Additionally, there are no occurrences of the old 'node-app' namespace in any YAML files, indicating a complete transition to the new namespace.
Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the namespace change. # Test 1: Check if the `node155` namespace exists. # Expect: The namespace should exist. kubectl get namespace node155 # Test 2: Search for the old namespace `node-app` usage in other YAML files. # Expect: No occurrences of the old namespace. fd -e yaml -X rg $'node-app'Length of output: 228
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the namespace change in YAML files # Search for the new namespace 'node155' in YAML files echo "Searching for 'node155' namespace:" fd -e yml -e yaml -X rg 'namespace:\s*node155' echo -e "\nSearching for old 'node-app' namespace:" fd -e yml -e yaml -X rg 'namespace:\s*node-app'Length of output: 538
22-22
: Verify the image change and perform thorough testing.Ensure that the
darshif5/simple-node-app:node-todo
image exists and is the intended image for this deployment. Thoroughly test the application with the new image to avoid any unexpected behavior or compatibility issues.Run the following script to verify the image existence:
k8s/replica-sets.yml
Outdated
labels: | ||
tier: node-label | ||
spec: | ||
containers: | ||
- name: node-container-rep | ||
image: trainwithshubham/node-app-batch-6 | ||
image: darshif5/simple-node-app:node-todo |
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.
Address the security concerns raised by the static analysis hints.
The updated container image (darshif5/simple-node-app:node-todo
) should be reviewed to ensure it follows security best practices:
-
Ensure that the container does not require or run with
allowPrivilegeEscalation
unless absolutely necessary. If privilege escalation is required, consider using a more granular security context or pod security policies to limit the scope of escalation. -
Avoid running the container as root. Instead, use a dedicated user with minimal required permissions. If root access is necessary for specific tasks, consider using
securityContext.runAsNonRoot
andsecurityContext.runAsUser
to enforce running as a non-root user by default.
Do you want me to open a GitHub issue to track these security enhancements or provide guidance on implementing the recommended changes?
Tools
checkov
[MEDIUM] 1-23: Containers should not run with allowPrivilegeEscalation
(CKV_K8S_20)
[MEDIUM] 1-23: Minimize the admission of root containers
(CKV_K8S_23)
Summary by CodeRabbit
New Features
Bug Fixes
Chores