chore(coordinated-policies): add rbac for coordinatedpolicies crd#202
Conversation
Summary of ChangesHello, I'm Gemini Code Assist1! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed! This pull request introduces the required Role-Based Access Control (RBAC) permissions for the new Highlights
🧠 New Feature in Public Preview: You can now enable Memory to help Gemini Code Assist learn from your team's feedback. This makes future code reviews more consistent and personalized to your project's style. Click here to enable Memory in your admin console. Changelog
Activity
Using Gemini Code AssistThe full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips. Invoking Gemini You can request assistance from Gemini at any point by creating a comment using either
Customization To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a Limitations & Feedback Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments. If you're interested in giving your feedback about your experience with Gemini Code Assist for GitHub and other Google products, sign up here. You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension. Footnotes
|
![gemini-code-assist[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/956858?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Code Review
This pull request adds RBAC permissions for the new coordinatedpolicies CRD. The changes correctly add the new resource and its status subresource to the ClusterRole. However, I've noticed that the permissions for the status subresource are overly broad and include verbs that are not applicable. I've left a comment with a suggestion to scope down the permissions for the status subresource to follow the principle of least privilege.
| - apiGroups: | ||
| - workloads.x-k8s.io | ||
| resources: | ||
| - coordinatedpolicies/status |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The list of verbs for this rule is overly permissive for a status subresource. The only effective verbs for a /status subresource are get, update, and patch. The other verbs in this rule (create, delete, list, watch) have no effect on a status subresource. Including them is confusing and violates the principle of least privilege.
To address this, I suggest moving coordinatedpolicies/status to a new rule with the correct verbs. You can remove this line and add the following rule block elsewhere in the file:
- apiGroups:
- workloads.x-k8s.io
resources:
- coordinatedpolicies/status
verbs:
- get
- patch
- updateWhile this PR only adds coordinatedpolicies/status, consider creating a follow-up to move all other status subresources to a correctly-scoped rule as well for consistency.
2 participants
Ⅰ. Motivation
Ⅱ. Modifications
Ⅲ. Does this pull request fix one issue?
fixes #XXXX
Ⅳ. List the added test cases (unit test/integration test) if any, please explain if no tests are needed.
Ⅴ. Describe how to verify it
VI. Special notes for reviews
Checklist
make fmt.