You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to issues@flink.apache.org by "Tim (Jira)" <ji...@apache.org> on 2022/07/14 16:50:00 UTC
[jira] [Created] (FLINK-28554) Kubernetes-Operator allow readOnlyRootFilesystem securityContext
Tim created FLINK-28554:
---------------------------
Summary: Kubernetes-Operator allow readOnlyRootFilesystem securityContext
Key: FLINK-28554
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-28554
Project: Flink
Issue Type: Improvement
Components: Kubernetes Operator
Affects Versions: kubernetes-operator-1.0.1
Reporter: Tim
It would be nice if the operator would support using the "readOnlyRootFilesystem" setting via the operatorSecurityContext. When using the default operator template the operator won't be able to start when using this setting because the config files mounted in `/opt/flink/conf` are now (of course) also read-only.
It would be nice if the default template would be written in such a way that it allows adding emptyDir volumes to /opt/flink/conf via the values.yaml. Which is not possible right now. Then the config files can remain editable by the operator while keeping the root filesystem read-only.
I have successfully tried that in my branch (see: [https://github.com/apache/flink-kubernetes-operator/commit/98c30d22ed998c7eccb66875de8884a701079412|https://github.com/apache/flink-kubernetes-operator/commit/98c30d22ed998c7eccb66875de8884a701079412)]) which prepares the operator template.
After this small change to the template it is possible add emptyDir volumes for the conf and tmp dirs and in the second step to enable the readOnlyRootFilesystem setting via the values.yaml
values.yaml
{code:java}
[...]
operatorVolumeMounts:
create: true
data:
- name: flink-conf
mountPath: /opt/flink/conf
subPath: conf
- name: flink-tmp
mountPath: /tmp
operatorVolumes:
create: true
data:
- name: flink-conf
emptyDir: {}
- name: flink-tmp
emptyDir: {}
operatorSecurityContext:
readOnlyRootFilesystem: true
[...]{code}
I think this could be a viable way to allow this security setting and I could turn this into a pull request if desired. What do you think about it? Or is there even a better way to achive this I didn't thought about yet?
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.10#820010)