Skip to main content
Version: 1.11

Testing for cluster operators

As a Kubernetes cluster operator, you'll want to perform testing for Kubewarden policies you want to use.

You'll have questions like:

  • What are the correct policy settings to get the validation/mutation outcome needed?
  • How can I be sure everything keeps working as expected when I:
    • upgrade the policy to a newer version?
    • add/change Kubernetes resources?
    • change the configuration parameters of the policy?
    • and so forth?

Kubewarden has a utility, kwctl, that permits testing of the policies outside of Kubernetes.

To use kwctl you invoke it with following inputs:

  1. A WebAssembly binary file URI of the policy to be run. The Kubewarden policy can load from the:
    • local filesystem file://
    • a HTTP(s) server https://
    • an OCI registry registry://.
  2. The admission request object to test. You give it with the --request-path argument. Use stdin by setting --request-path to -.
  3. The policy settings for runtime as an inline JSON via --settings-json flag. Or a JSON, or a YAML file, loaded from the file system via --settings-path.

After the test kwctl, prints the ValidationResponse object to the standard output.

You can download pre-built binaries of kwctl here.

A testing example

This section describes how to test the psp-apparmor policy with different configurations and validation request objects.

Create AdmissionReview requests

You need to create files holding the AdmissionReview objects to test the policy.

You can create a file named pod-req-no-specific-apparmor-profile.json with the following contents:

pod-req-no-specific-apparmor-profile.json
{
"uid": "1299d386-525b-4032-98ae-1949f69f9cfc",
"kind": {
"kind": "Pod",
"version": "v1"
},
"object": {
"metadata": {
"name": "no-apparmor"
},
"spec": {
"containers": [
{
"image": "nginx",
"name": "nginx"
}
]
}
},
"operation": "CREATE",
"requestKind": {"version": "v1", "kind": "Pod"},
"userInfo": {
"username": "alice",
"uid": "alice-uid",
"groups": ["system:authenticated"]
}
}

This request tries to create a Pod that doesn't specify any AppArmor profile to use. This is because it doesn't have an annotation with the container.apparmor.security.beta.kubernetes.io/<container-name> key.

You can create a file named pod-req-apparmor-unconfined.json with the following contents:

pod-req-apparmor-unconfined.json
{
"uid": "1299d386-525b-4032-98ae-1949f69f9cfc",
"kind": {
"kind": "Pod",
"version": "v1"
},
"object": {
"metadata": {
"name": "privileged-pod",
"annotations": {
"container.apparmor.security.beta.kubernetes.io/nginx": "unconfined"
}
},
"spec": {
"containers": [
{
"image": "nginx",
"name": "nginx"
}
]
}
},
"operation": "CREATE",
"requestKind": {"version": "v1", "kind": "Pod"},
"userInfo": {
"username": "alice",
"uid": "alice-uid",
"groups": ["system:authenticated"]
}
}

This request tries to create a Pod with a container called nginx running with the unconfined AppArmor profile. This is for tutorial purposes only. Running in unconfined mode is a bad security practice.

Now you can create a file named pod-req-apparmor-custom.json with the following contents:

pod-req-apparmor-custom.json
{
"uid": "1299d386-525b-4032-98ae-1949f69f9cfc",
"kind": {
"kind": "Pod",
"version": "v1"
},
"object": {
"metadata": {
"name": "privileged-pod",
"annotations": {
"container.apparmor.security.beta.kubernetes.io/nginx": "localhost/nginx-custom"
}
},
"spec": {
"containers": [
{
"image": "nginx",
"name": "nginx"
}
]
}
},
"operation": "CREATE",
"requestKind": {"version": "v1", "kind": "Pod"},
"userInfo": {
"username": "alice",
"uid": "alice-uid",
"groups": ["system:authenticated"]
}
}
note

These are all simplified AdmissionReview objects. Only the fields relevant to our testing of the policy are used.

Test the policy

Now you can use kwctl to test the creation of a Pod not specifying an AppArmor profile:

$ kwctl run \
--request-path pod-req-no-specific-apparmor-profile.json \
registry://ghcr.io/kubewarden/policies/psp-apparmor:v0.1.4 \
| jq

The policy accepts the request and produces output like:

{
"uid": "1299d386-525b-4032-98ae-1949f69f9cfc",
"allowed": true
}

The policy rejects the creation of a Pod with an unconfined AppArmor profile:

$ kwctl run \
--request-path pod-req-apparmor-unconfined.json \
registry://ghcr.io/kubewarden/policies/psp-apparmor:v0.1.4 \
| jq
{
"uid": "1299d386-525b-4032-98ae-1949f69f9cfc",
"allowed": false,
"status": {
"message": "These AppArmor profiles are not allowed: [\"unconfined\"]"
}
}

On both occasions you ran the policy without providing any kind of setting. As the policy's documentation states, this results in preventing the usage of non-default profiles.

The Pod using a custom nginx profile gets rejected by the policy too:

$ kwctl run \
--request-path pod-req-apparmor-custom.json \
registry://ghcr.io/kubewarden/policies/psp-apparmor:v0.1.4 \
| jq
{
"uid": "1299d386-525b-4032-98ae-1949f69f9cfc",
"allowed": false,
"status": {
"message": "These AppArmor profiles are not allowed: [\"localhost/nginx-custom\"]"
}
}

You can change the default behavior, allowing chosen AppArmor profiles to be used:

$ kwctl run \
--request-path pod-req-apparmor-custom.json \
--settings-json '{"allowed_profiles": ["runtime/default", "localhost/nginx-custom"]}' \
registry://ghcr.io/kubewarden/policies/psp-apparmor:v0.1.4 \
| jq

Now the request succeeds:

{
"uid": "1299d386-525b-4032-98ae-1949f69f9cfc",
"allowed": true
}

Automation

You can automate all these steps using bats.

You can write a series of tests and integrate their execution inside your existing CI and CD pipelines.

The commands can be "wrapped" into a bats test:

A batstest
@test "all is good" {
run kwctl run \
--request-path pod-req-no-specific-apparmor-profile.json \
registry://ghcr.io/kubewarden/policies/psp-apparmor:v0.1.4

# this prints the output when one the checks below fails
echo "output = ${output}"

# request accepted
[ $(expr "$output" : '.*"allowed":true.*') -ne 0 ]
}

@test "reject" {
run kwctl run \
--request-path pod-req-apparmor-custom.json \
registry://ghcr.io/kubewarden/policies/psp-apparmor:v0.1.4

# this prints the output when one the checks below fails
echo "output = ${output}"

# request rejected
[ $(expr "$output" : '.*"allowed":false.*') -ne 0 ]
}

If the bats code is in the file e2e.bats, you can run the test as:

$ bats e2e.bats
✓ all is good
✓ reject

2 tests, 0 failures

This section has more about writing end-to-end tests for your policies.