Conversation
Replaces hardcoded securityContext stanza's with values that can be overwritten by users if needed
|
@dmaes: There are no 'kind' label on this PR. You need a 'kind' label to generate the release automatically.
DetailsI am a bot created to help the crowdsecurity developers manage community feedback and contributions. You can check out my manifest file to understand my behavior and what I can do. If you want to use this for your project, you can check out the forked project rr404/oss-governance-bot repository. |
|
@dmaes: There are no area labels on this PR. You can add as many areas as you see fit.
DetailsI am a bot created to help the crowdsecurity developers manage community feedback and contributions. You can check out my manifest file to understand my behavior and what I can do. If you want to use this for your project, you can check out the forked project rr404/oss-governance-bot repository. |
|
/kind enhancement |
github-actions
bot
added
kind/enhancement
|
I am also interested in this PR. |
| securityContext: | ||
| allowPrivilegeEscalation: false | ||
| privileged: false | ||
| {{- toYaml .Values.appsec.wai_for_lapi.securityContext | nindent 10 }} |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Small typo here, should be wait_for_lapi
3 participants
I actually needed #90 , but since it hasn't had any activity since over a year, and is making multiple changes (that IMHO should be split into different PR's) at once, I've created this simple change that gives users the flexibility to overwrite the
securityContextdefinitions, while at the same time not breaking any existing deployments.