In Kubernetes, Admission Controllers enforce semantic validation of objects during create, update, and delete operations. With OPA you can enforce custom policies on Kubernetes objects without recompiling or reconfiguring the Kubernetes API server or even Kubernetes Admission Controllers.
This primer assumes you, the Kubernetes administrator, have already installed OPA as a validating admission controller on Kubernetes as described in the Kubernetes Admission Control Tutorial. And now you are at the point where you want to write your own policies.
OPA was designed to write policies over arbitrary JSON/YAML. It does NOT have built-in concepts like pods, deployments, or services. OPA just sees the JSON/YAML sent by Kubernetes API server and allows you to write whatever policy you want to make a decision. You as the policy-author know the semantics–what that JSON/YAML represents.
Example Policy: Image Registry Safety
To get started, let’s look at a common policy: ensure all images come from a trusted registry.
1: package kubernetes.admission
2: deny[msg] {
3: input.request.kind.kind == "Pod"
4: image := input.request.object.spec.containers[_].image
5: not startswith(image, "hooli.com")
6: msg := sprintf("image fails to come from trusted registry: %v", [image])
7: }
Policies and Packages.
In line 1 the package kubernetes.admission
declaration gives the (hierarchical) name kubernetes.admission
to the rules in the remainder of the policy. The default installation of OPA as an admission controller assumes your rules are in the package kubernetes.admission
.
Deny Rules. For admission control, you write deny
statements. Order does not matter. (OPA is far more flexible than this, but we recommend writing just deny
statements to start.) In line 2, the head of the rule deny[msg]
says that the admission control request should be rejected and the user handed the error message msg
if the conditions in the body (the statements between the {}
) are true.
deny
is the set of error messages that should be returned to the user. Each rule you write adds to that set of error messages.
For example, suppose you tried to create the Pod below with nginx and mysql images.
kind: Pod
apiVersion: v1
metadata:
name: myapp
spec:
containers:
- image: nginx
name: nginx-frontend
- image: mysql
name: mysql-backend
deny
evaluates to the following set of messages.
[
"image fails to come from trusted registry: nginx",
"image fails to come from trusted registry: mysql"
]
Input In OPA, input
is a reserved, global variable whose value is the Kubernetes AdmissionReview object that the API server hands to any admission control webhook.
AdmissionReview objects have many fields. The rule above uses input.request.kind
, which includes the usual group/version/kind information. The rule also uses input.request.object
, which is the YAML that the user provided to kubectl
(augmented with defaults, timestamps, etc.). The full input
object is 50+ lines of YAML, so below we show just the relevant parts.
apiVersion: admission.k8s.io/v1beta1
kind: AdmissionReview
request:
kind:
group:
kind: Pod
version: v1
object:
metadata:
name: myapp
spec:
containers:
- image: nginx
name: nginx-frontend
- image: mysql
name: mysql-backend
Dot notation In line 3 input.request.kind.kind == "Pod"
, the expression input.request.kind.kind
does the obvious thing: it descends through the YAML hierarchy. The dot (.) operator never throws any errors; if the path does not exist the value of the expression is undefined
.
You can see OPA’s evaluation in the REPL.
> input.request.kind
{
"group": null,
"kind": "Pod",
"version": "v1"
}
> input.request.kind.kind
"Pod"
> input.request.object.spec.containers
[
{
"image": "nginx",
"name": "nginx-frontend"
},
{
"image": "mysql",
"name": "mysql-backend"
}
]
Equality. Lines 3,4,6 all use a form of equality. There are 3 forms of equality in OPA.
x := 7
declares a local variablex
and assigns variablex
to the value 7. The compiler throws an error ifx
already has a value.x == 7
returns true ifx
’s value is 7. The compiler throws an error ifx
has no value.x = 7
either assignsx
to 7 ifx
has no value or comparesx
’s value to 7 if it has a value. The compiler never throws an error.
The recommendation for rule-writing is to use :=
and ==
wherever possible. Rules written with :=
and ==
are easier to write and to read. =
is invaluable in more advanced use cases, and outside of rules is the only supported form of equality.
Arrays. Lines 4-5 find images in the Pod that don’t come from the trusted registry. To do that, they use the []
operator, which does what you expect: index into the array.
Continuing the example from earlier:
> input.request.object.spec.containers[0]
{
"image": "nginx",
"name": "nginx-frontend"
}
> input.request.object.spec.containers[0].image
"nginx"
The []
operators let you use variables to index into the array as well.
> i := 0
> input.request.object.spec.containers[i]
{
"image": "nginx",
"name": "nginx-frontend"
}
Iteration The containers array has an unknown number of elements, so to implement an image registry check you need to iterate over them. Iteration in OPA requires no new syntax. In fact, OPA is always iterating–it’s always searching for all variable assignments that make the conditions in the rule true. It’s just that sometimes the search is so easy people don’t think of it as iteration/search.
To iterate over the indexes in the input.request.object.spec.containers
array, you just put a variable that has no value in for the index. OPA will do what it always does: find values for that variable that make the conditions true.
In the REPL, OPA detects when there will be multiple answers and displays all the results in a table.
> input.request.object.spec.containers[j]
+---+-------------------------------------------+
| j | input.request.object.spec.containers[j] |
+---+-------------------------------------------+
| 0 | {"image":"nginx","name":"nginx-frontend"} |
| 1 | {"image":"mysql","name":"mysql-backend"} |
+---+-------------------------------------------+
Often you don’t want to invent new variable names for iteration. OPA provides the special anonymous variable _
for exactly that reason. So in line (4) image := input.request.object.spec.containers[_].image
finds all the images in the containers array and assigns each to the image
variable one at a time.
Builtins. On line 5 the builtin startswith
checks if one string is a prefix of the other. The builtin sprintf
on line 6 formats a string with arguments. OPA has 50+ builtins detailed at openpolicyagent.org/docs/language-reference.
Builtins let you analyze and manipulate:
- Numbers, Strings, Regexs, Networks
- Aggregates, Arrays, Sets
- Types
- Encodings (base64, YAML, JSON, URL, JWT)
- Time
Unit Testing Policies
When you write policies, you should use the OPA unit-test framework before sending the policies out into the OPA that is running on your cluster. The debugging process will be much quicker and effective. Here’s an example test for the policy from the last section.
1: package kubernetes.test_admission
2: import data.kubernetes.admission
3:
4: test_image_safety {
5: unsafe_image := {"request": {
6: "kind": {"kind": "Pod"},
7: "object": {"spec": {"containers": [
8: {"image": "hooli.com/nginx"},
9: {"image": "busybox"}]}}}}
10: count(admission.deny) == 1 with input as unsafe_image
11: }
Different Package. On line 1 the package
directive puts these tests in a different package than admission control policy itself. This is the recommended best practice.
Import. On line 2 import data.kubernetes.admission
allows us to reference the admission control policy using the name admission
everwhere in the test package. import
is not strictly necessary–it simply sets up an alias; you could instead reference data.kubernetes.admission
inside the rules.
Unit Test. On line 4 test_image_safety
defines a unittest. If the rule evaluates to true the test passes; otherwise it fails. When you use the OPA test runner, anything in any package starting with test
is treated as a test.
Assignment. On line 5 unsafe_image
is the input we want to use for the test. Ideally this would be a real AdmissionReview object, though those are so long that in this example we hand-rolled a partial input.
Dot for packages. On line 11 we use the Dot operator on a package. admission.deny
runs (all) the deny
rule(s) in package admission
(and all other deny
rules in the admission
package).
Test Input. Also on line 11 the stanza with input as unsafe_image
sets the value of input
to be unsafe_image
while evaluating count(admission.deny) == 1
.
Running Tests. If you’ve created the files image-safety.rego and test-image-safety.rego in the current directory then you run the tests by naming the files explicitly as shown below or by handing the opa test
command the directory (and subdirectories) of files to load: opa test .
$ opa test image-safety.rego test-image-safety.rego
PASS: 1/1
External Resources: Ingress Conflicts
The image-repository example shows an example where you can make a policy decision using just the one JSON/YAML file describing the resource in question. But sometimes you need to know what other resources exist in the cluster to make an allow/deny decision.
For example, it’s possible to accidentally configure two Kubernetes ingresses so that one steals traffic from the other. The policy that prevents conflicting ingresses needs to compare the ingress that’s being created/updated with all of the existing ingresses. Just knowing the new/updated ingress isn’t enough information to make an allow/deny decision.
Below is a partial example of the input OPA sees when someone creates an ingress. To avoid conflicts, we want to prevent two ingresses from having the same request.object.spec.rules.host
. If OPA has only this one ingress configuration it doesn’t have enough information to make an allow/deny decision; it also needs the configurations for all of the existing ingresses.
apiVersion: admission.k8s.io/v1beta1
kind: AdmissionReview
request:
kind:
group: extensions
kind: Ingress
version: v1beta1
object:
metadata:
name: prod
spec:
rules:
- host: initech.com
http:
paths:
- path: /finance
backend:
serviceName: banking
servicePort: 443
To avoid conflicting ingresses, you write a policy like the one that follows.
1: package kubernetes.admission
2: deny[msg] {
3: input.request.kind.kind == "Ingress"
4: newhost := input.request.object.spec.rules[_].host
5: oldhost := data.kubernetes.ingresses[namespace][name].spec.rules[_].host
6: newhost == oldhost
7: msg := sprintf("ingress host conflicts with ingress %v/%v", [namespace, name])
8: }
The first part of the rule you already understand:
- Line (3) checks if the
input
is an Ingress - Line (4) iterates over all the rules in the
input
ingress and looks up thehost
field for each of its rules.
Existing K8s Resources Line (5) iterates over ingresses that already exist in Kubernetes. data
is a global variable where (among other things) OPA has a record of the current resources inside Kubernetes. The line oldhost := data.kubernetes.ingresses[namespace][name].spec.rules[_].host
finds all ingresses in all namespaces, iterates over all the rules
inside each of those and assigns the host
field to the variable oldhost
. Whenever newhost == oldhost
, there’s a conflict, and the OPA rule includes an appropriate error message into the deny
set.
In this case the rule uses explicit variable names namespace
and name
for iteration so that it can use those variables again when constructing the error message in line 7.
Schema Differences. Both input
and data.kubernetes.ingresses[namespace][name]
represent ingresses, but they do it differently.
input
is a K8s AdmissionReview object. It includes several fields in addition to the K8s Ingress object itself.data.kubernetes.ingresses[namespace][name]
is a native Kubernetes Ingress object as returned by the API.
Here are two examples.
apiVersion: extensions/v1beta1
kind: Ingress
metadata:
name: prod
spec:
rules:
- host: initech.com
http:
paths:
- path: /finance
backend:
serviceName: banking
servicePort: 443
apiVersion: admission.k8s.io/v1beta1
kind: AdmissionReview
request:
kind:
group: extensions
kind: Ingress
version: v1beta1
operation: CREATE
userInfo:
groups:
username: alice
object:
metadata:
name: prod
spec:
rules:
- host: initech.com
http:
paths:
- path: /finance
backend:
serviceName: banking
servicePort: 443
Admission Control Flow
Here is a sample of the flow of information from the user to the API server to OPA and back.
It starts with someone (or something) running kubectl
(or sending a request to
the API server.) For example, a user might run kubkectl create -f pod.yaml
:
pod.yaml:
kind: Pod
apiVersion: v1
metadata:
name: nginx
labels:
app: nginx
spec:
containers:
- image: nginx
name: nginx
When the request reaches the API server it’s authenticated and authorized and processed by the admission controllers. When the API server’s Webhook admission controller executes, the API server sends a webhook request to OPA containing an AdmissionReview object.
AdmissionReview:
apiVersion: admission.k8s.io/v1beta1
kind: AdmissionReview
request:
kind:
group: ''
kind: Pod
version: v1
namespace: opa
object:
metadata:
creationTimestamp: '2018-10-27T02:12:20Z'
labels:
app: nginx
name: nginx
namespace: opa
uid: bbfee96d-d98d-11e8-b280-080027868e77
spec:
containers:
- image: nginx
imagePullPolicy: Always
name: nginx
resources: {}
terminationMessagePath: "/dev/termination-log"
terminationMessagePolicy: File
volumeMounts:
- mountPath: "/var/run/secrets/kubernetes.io/serviceaccount"
name: default-token-tm9v8
readOnly: true
dnsPolicy: ClusterFirst
restartPolicy: Always
schedulerName: default-scheduler
securityContext: {}
serviceAccount: default
serviceAccountName: default
terminationGracePeriodSeconds: 30
tolerations:
- effect: NoExecute
key: node.kubernetes.io/not-ready
operator: Exists
tolerationSeconds: 300
- effect: NoExecute
key: node.kubernetes.io/unreachable
operator: Exists
tolerationSeconds: 300
volumes:
- name: default-token-tm9v8
secret:
secretName: default-token-tm9v8
status:
phase: Pending
qosClass: BestEffort
oldObject:
operation: CREATE
resource:
group: ''
resource: pods
version: v1
uid: bbfeef88-d98d-11e8-b280-080027868e77
userInfo:
groups:
- system:masters
- system:authenticated
username: minikube-user
Typically the API server is configured (via ValidatingWebhookConfiguration
or
MutatingWebhookConfiguration
objects) to query OPA without providing the name
of a decision. For example:
POST / HTTP/1.1
Content-Type: application/json
{
"apiVersion": "admission.k8s.io/v1beta1",
"kind": "AdmissionReview",
"request": ...
}
When OPA receives the webhook request, it binds the payload to the input
document and generates the default decision: system.main
. The system.main
decision is defined by a rule that evaluates all of the admission control
policies that have been loaded into OPA.
As the administrator responsible for deploying OPA, you have full control over
the system.main
decision (i.e., it is just another Rego policy.) A basic
implementation of the system.main
policy simply evaluates all deny rules that
have been loaded into OPA and unions the results:
package system
import data.kubernetes.admission
main = {
"apiVersion": "admission.k8s.io/v1beta1",
"kind": "AdmissionReview",
"response": response,
}
default response = {"allowed": true}
response = {
"allowed": false,
"status": {
"reason": reason,
},
} {
reason = concat(", ", admission.deny)
reason != ""
}
The system.main
policy MUST generate an AdmissionReview object containing
a response that the API server can interpret. If the request should be allowed,
the response.allowed
field should be true. Otherwise, the response.allowed
field should be set to false
and the response.status.reason
field should be
set to include an error message that indicates why the request is being
rejected. The error message will be returned to the API server caller (e.g., the
user running kubectl
). Often the error message is the concatenation of all the
messages in the deny
set defined above.
For example, with the input and Image Registry Safety examples above, the response from OPA would be:
apiVersion: admission.k8s.io/v1beta1
kind: AdmissionReview
response:
allowed: false
status:
reason: "image fails to come from trusted registry: nginx"
For more detail on how Kubernetes Admission Control works, see this blog post on kubernetes.io.
Debugging Tips
If you run into problems getting OPA to enforce admission control policies in Kubernetes there are a few things you can check to make sure everything is configured correctly. If none of these tips work, feel free to join slack.openpolicyagent.org and ask for help.
Check for the openpolicyagent.org/policy-status
annotation on ConfigMaps containing policies
If you are loading policies into OPA via
kube-mgmt you can check the
openpolicyagent.org/policy-status
annotation on ConfigMaps that contain your
policies. The annotation should be set to "ok"
if the policy was loaded
successfully. If errors occured during loading (e.g., because the policy
contained a syntax error) the cause will be reported here.
If the annotation is
missing entirely, check the kube-mgmt
container logs for connection errors
between the container and the Kubernetes API server.
Check the kube-mgmt
container logs for error messages
When kube-mgmt
is healthy, the container logs will be quiet/empty. If you are
trying to enforce policies based on Kubernetes context (e.g., to check for
ingress conflicts) then you need to make sure that kube-mgmt
can replicate
Kubernetes objects into OPA. If kube-mgmt
is unable to list/watch resources in
the Kubernetes API server, they will not be replicated into OPA and the policy
will not get enforced.
Check the opa
container logs for TLS errors
Communication between the Kubernetes API server and OPA is secured with TLS. If the CA bundle specified in the webhook configuration is out-of-sync with the server certificate that OPA is configured with, OPA will log errors indicating a TLS issue. Verify that the CA bundle specified in the validating or mutating webhook configurations matches the server certificate you configured OPA to use.
Check for POST requests in the opa
container logs
When the Kubernetes API server queries OPA for admission control decisions, it
sends HTTP POST
requests. If there are no POST
requests contained in the
opa
container logs, it indicates that the webhook configuration is wrong or
there is a network connectivity problem between the Kubernetes API server and
OPA.
- If you have access to the Kubernetes API server logs, review them to see if they indicate the cause.
- If you are running on AWS EKS make sure your security group settings allow traffic from Kubernetes “master” nodes to the node(s) where OPA is running.
Ensure the webhook is configured for the proper namespaces
When you create the webhook according to the installation instructions, it includes a namespaceSelector so that you can decide which namespaces to ignore.
namespaceSelector:
matchExpressions:
- key: openpolicyagent.org/webhook
operator: NotIn
values:
- ignore
If OPA seems to not be making the decisions you expect, check if the namespace
is using the label openpolicyagent.org/webhook: ignore
.
If OPA is making decision on namespaces (like kube-system
) that you would
prefer OPA would ignore, assign the namespace the label
openpolicyagent.org/webhook: ignore
.
Ensure mutating policies construct JSON Patches correctly
If you are using OPA to enforce mutating admission policies you must ensure the
JSON Patch objects you generate escape “/” characters in the JSON Pointer. For
example, if you are generating a JSON Patch that sets annotations like
acmecorp.com/myannotation
you need to escape the “/” character in the
annotation name using ~1
(per RFC
6901).
Correct:
{
"op": "add",
"path": "/metadata/annotations/acmecorp.com~1myannotation",
"value": "somevalue"
}
Incorrect:
{
"op": "add",
"path": "/metadata/annotations/acmecorp.com/myannotation",
"value": "somevalue"
}
In addition, when your policy generates the response for the Kubernetes API
server, you must use the base64.encode
built-in function to encode the JSON
Patch objects. DO NOT use the base64url.encode
function because the Kubernetes
API server will not process it:
Correct:
main = {
"apiVersion": "admission.k8s.io/v1beta1",
"kind": "AdmissionReview",
"response": response,
}
response = {
"allowed": true,
"patchType": "JSONPatch",
"patch": base64.encode(json.marshal(patches)) # <-- GOOD: uses base64.encode
}
patches = [
{
"op": "add",
"path": "/metadata/annotations/acmecorp.com~1myannotation",
"value": "somevalue"
}
]
Incorrect:
main = {
"apiVersion": "admission.k8s.io/v1beta1",
"kind": "AdmissionReview",
"response": response,
}
response = {
"allowed": true,
"patchType": "JSONPatch",
"patch": base64url.encode(json.marshal(patches)) # <-- BAD: uses base64url.encode
}
patches = [
{
"op": "add",
"path": "/metadata/annotations/acmecorp.com~1myannotation",
"value": "somevalue"
}
]
Also, for more examples of how to construct mutating policies and integrating them with validating policies, see these examples in https://github.com/open-policy-agent/library.
Feedback
Was this page helpful?
Glad to hear it! Please tell us how we can improve.
Sorry to hear that. Please tell us how we can improve.