`5.4.1` and `5.4.2` Consider adding a test for public access

[karikarshivani]

The guidance states that authorized IP addresses should be added to an allowlist. To me, this sounds like 0.0.0.0/0 should lead to a failed test - even if the user adds it to the allow list - because allowing requests from all IP addresses essentially defeats the purpose of an allowlist.

Maybe we can modify the describe block so that the control doesn't pass if the user just looks at the following output and adds 0.0.0.0/0 to the input:

actual_allowlist.each do |cidr|
  describe 'Cluster allowlist should match expected allowlist' do
    subject { cidr }
      it { should be_in expected_allowlist }
      it { should_not eq '0.0.0.0/0' } # or something like that
  end
end

I understand if the implication from guidance is insufficient to include a test like this in the control.

[karikarshivani]

After discussing with @ejaronne, one approach that would be helpful is to have an if statement that checks for 0.0.0.0/0 in the input first and asks for a manual review if it's found; else go through the list of IP addresses configured on the instance to compare with the allowlist input. Also, language from the guidance can be used for the manual review in the skip statement. Thanks @ejaronne for the recommendation!

[wdower]

This makes sense. Note that we're pretty much requiring people to specifically define a restricted IP range as an input; we can't give them a default value for the input since we won't know what the IP range will be.

I re-read the CIS benchmark and noticed that: | "If you specify no CIDR blocks, then the public API server endpoint receives requests from all (0.0.0.0/0) IP addresses." So we need to make sure the allowlist is not empty as well --

actual_allowlist.each do |cidr|
  describe 'Cluster allowlist should match expected allowlist' do
    subject { cidr }
      it { should be_in expected_allowlist }
      it { should_not eq '0.0.0.0/0' } # or something like that
      it { should_not eq [] } # etc etc
  end
end