openshift-ci-robot
commented
3 weeks ago @cybertron: This pull request references Jira Issue OCPBUGS-36175, which is invalid:
- expected the bug to target the "4.17.0" version, but no target version was set
Comment /jira refresh to re-evaluate validity if changes to the Jira bug are made, or edit the title of this pull request to link to a different bug.
The bug has been updated to refer to the pull request using the external bug tracker.
In response to [this](https://github.com/openshift/machine-config-operator/pull/4443):
>It turns out we don't need this in some cases and in others we can get by with specific capabilities instead of a fully privileged container. This is more secure because it means even a compromised container won't have as much ability to cause trouble.
>
>
>
>**- What I did**
>
>**- How to verify it**
>
>**- Description for the changelog**
>
>
Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available [here](https://prow.ci.openshift.org/command-help?repo=openshift%2Fmachine-config-operator). If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the [openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin](https://github.com/openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin/issues/new) repository.
cybertron
mkowalski
openshift-ci[bot]
It turns out we don't need this in some cases and in others we can get by with specific capabilities instead of a fully privileged container. This is more secure because it means even a compromised container won't have as much ability to cause trouble.
- What I did
- How to verify it
- Description for the changelog