search

aws-samples / hardeneks

Runs checks to see if an EKS cluster follows EKS Best Practices.
https://aws-samples.github.io/hardeneks/
MIT No Attribution
862 stars 91 forks source link

JSON output option #17

Closed dorukozturk closed 1 year ago

kuettai commented 1 year ago

@dorukozturk , herewith the proposed JSON output that will help:

{ "cluster_wide": { "security": { "iam": { "disable_anonymous_access_for_cluster_roles": ["RESOURCE#1", "RESOURCE#3"] }, "multi_tenancy": { "ensure_namespace_quotas_exist": ["RESOURCE#4"] } }, "reliability": { "applications": { "check_metrics_server_is_running": ["RESOURCE#1", "RESOURCE#2"], "check_vertical_pod_autoscaler_exists": ["RESOURCE#3"] } } }, "namespace_based": { "pod_security": { "disallow_container_socket_mount": ["RESOURCE#4", "RESOURCE#2", "RESOURCE#1"], "set_requests_limits_for_containers": ["RESOURCE#5"] } } }

kuettai commented 1 year ago

Do we have estimate timeline on when this will be deliver? @dorukozturk

dorukozturk commented 1 year ago

@kuettai Realistically, early March I can deliver this. Even though it is relatively simple, I am planning to refactor the code a little and will try to integrate this feature as part of that big refactor.

mission-coliveros commented 1 year ago

I'd also be interested in this. Would simplify the process of introducing failed checks to a board

dorukozturk commented 1 year ago

@mission-coliveros This PR implements it (https://github.com/aws-samples/hardeneks/pull/21). It is getting reviewed and will be merged soon. After that I will release the new version and close this issue. Thanks for trying :)