kubeflow / model-registry

Apache License 2.0
85 stars 44 forks source link

Monitor CVE reports as provided by KF/manifest team #327

Open tarilabs opened 2 months ago

tarilabs commented 2 months ago

With KF 1.9, the Platform (KF/Manifest) team is introducing CVE reporting. ref: https://blog.kubeflow.org/kubeflow-1.9-release/#cve-scanning

Since https://github.com/kubeflow/manifests/pull/2860 it is possible to access the reports for the whole KF platform by accessing the zip archive in any of the run from: https://github.com/kubeflow/manifests/actions/workflows/trivy.yaml

With https://github.com/kubeflow/manifests/pull/2856 we avoid a double-counting in the final report for image which are shared across WGs/Components (ie: we share Mysql and gcr.io/tfx-oss-public/ml_metadata_store_server)

Baseline

From the KF 1.9 release, this numbers where reported:

Screenshot 2024-09-02 at 10 26 40

September 2nd

Source images

Scanning  kubeflow/model-registry:latest
+----------+------+--------+-----+
| Critical | High | Medium | Low |
+----------+------+--------+-----+
|    0     |  0   |   11   |  68 |
+----------+------+--------+-----+

Shared images

Scanning  gcr.io/tfx-oss-public/ml_metadata_store_server:1.14.0
+----------+------+--------+-----+
| Critical | High | Medium | Low |
+----------+------+--------+-----+
|    0     |  0   |   35   |  41 |
+----------+------+--------+-----+

Scanning  mysql:8.0.3
+----------+------+--------+-----+
| Critical | High | Medium | Low |
+----------+------+--------+-----+
|    17    |  71  |   55   |  42 |
+----------+------+--------+-----+
tarilabs commented 2 months ago

It looks to me to get better numbers we need to have coordination with KFP WG for which we copy the MLMD setup.

I notice mysql:8.0.39 as also suggested in https://github.com/kubeflow/model-registry/pull/267 would improve some of this numbers, although same considerations as above, since it seems to be also failing the bare minimal K8s test we have on this repo.

tarilabs commented 1 month ago

On suggestion received during the MR biweekly meeting 2024-09-16, I've raised the question about the shared DB image in the Discussion forum for the KFP WG: https://github.com/kubeflow/pipelines/discussions/11224