Skip to content
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

Align correct cis benchmarks with k8s versions #1614

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

dereknola
Copy link
Contributor

@dereknola dereknola commented May 15, 2024

Per offical CIS benchmark PDFs, the cis versions are slightly off in the docs

CIS v1.7.1 calls out

This document provides prescriptive guidance for establishing a secure configuration
posture for Kubernetes v1.25

And cis v1.8.0 calls out

This document provides prescriptive guidance for establishing a secure configuration
posture for Kubernetes v1.27.

Since there is no mention of v1.26, I took the assumption the CIS v1.7.1 covers it.

FYI: cis 1.9 whenever that gets done in kube-bench is supposed to:

This document provides prescriptive guidance for establishing a secure configuration
posture for Kubernetes v1.27 - v1.29.

Signed-off-by: Derek Nola [email protected]

Copy link
Contributor

@andypitcher andypitcher left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@dereknola CIS-1.7.1 was a bug release, so it kept the same targeted versions as CIS-1.7 (k8s 1.25).

Here is the K8s version scope for each CIS that were defined by CIS Workbench (strangely CIS-1.9 and 1.10 are overlapping, but maybe that would be fixed once 1.10 is released):

@dereknola
Copy link
Contributor Author

Its quite annoying that there is conflicting information between the PDF versions of the CIS benchmark and the online version of the benchmark 😠

@dereknola dereknola closed this May 22, 2024
@dereknola dereknola deleted the adjust_cis_guidance branch July 11, 2024 20:49
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants