AGENT SKILL

implementing-kubernetes-pod-security-standards

Chooses and applies the correct Kubernetes Pod Security Standard (Privileged, Baseline, Restricted) for a workload: what each profile forbids, how to map existing workloads to a profile, which securityContext fields must change, and how to plan a PodSecurityPolicy-to-PSS migration without breaking running pods. Use when deciding which pod security profile a namespace or workload should run under, auditing which workloads would fail Restricted, planning a PSP migration, or mapping pod security posture to a compliance control. Keywords: Pod Security Standards, PSS, Privileged, Baseline, Restricted, securityContext, runAsNonRoot, drop ALL capabilities, seccomp RuntimeDefault, PSP migration. Do not use for configuring the admission controller that enforces these profiles - use implementing-pod-security-admission-controller.

License 许可
Apache-2.0
最近更新
2026-08-31
Stars
★ 3.6w
Forks
4.4k

01 前言 Front Matter

name
implementing-kubernetes-pod-security-standards
tags
[ "containers", "kubernetes", "security", "pod-security", "PSA" ]
author
mahipal
domain
cybersecurity
license
Apache-2.0
version
1.0
nist_csf
[ "PR.PS-01", "PR.IR-01", "ID.AM-08", "DE.CM-01" ]
subdomain
container-security
description
Chooses and applies the correct Kubernetes Pod Security Standard (Privileged, Baseline, Restricted) for a workload: what each profile forbids, how to map existing workloads to a profile, which securityContext fields must change, and how to plan a PodSecurityPolicy-to-PSS migration without breaking running pods. Use when deciding which pod security profile a namespace or workload should run under, auditing which workloads would fail Restricted, planning a PSP migration, or mapping pod security posture to a compliance control. Keywords: Pod Security Standards, PSS, Privileged, Baseline, Restricted, securityContext, runAsNonRoot, drop ALL capabilities, seccomp RuntimeDefault, PSP migration. Do not use for configuring the admission controller that enforces these profiles - use implementing-pod-security-admission-controller.
mitre_attack
[ "T1610", "T1611", "T1609", "T1525" ]

02 资源文件 7

03 SKILL.md 正文

Implementing Kubernetes Pod Security Standards

Overview

Pod Security Standards (PSS) define three levels of security policies -- Privileged, Baseline, and Restricted -- enforced by the Pod Security Admission (PSA) controller built into Kubernetes 1.25+. PSA replaces the deprecated PodSecurityPolicy and provides namespace-level enforcement with three modes: enforce, audit, and warn.

When to Use

  • Deciding whether a namespace or workload belongs at Privileged, Baseline, or Restricted
  • Auditing which existing workloads would be rejected if Restricted were enforced today
  • Translating a "must meet Restricted" requirement into concrete securityContext changes
  • Planning a PodSecurityPolicy migration and predicting what will break before it does
  • Mapping pod security posture to a compliance control (NIST PR.PS-01, CIS Kubernetes)

Not this skill: configuring the controller that enforces these profiles — namespace labels, AdmissionConfiguration, exemptions, or debugging a pod PSA rejected. Use implementing-pod-security-admission-controller.

Prerequisites

  • Kubernetes cluster 1.25+ (PSA GA)
  • kubectl configured with cluster-admin access
  • Understanding of Linux capabilities and security contexts

Core Concepts

Three Security Profiles

Profile Purpose Restrictions
Privileged Unrestricted, system workloads None
Baseline Prevents known escalations No hostNetwork, hostPID, hostIPC, privileged containers, dangerous capabilities
Restricted Hardened best practices Non-root, drop ALL caps, seccomp required, read-only rootfs recommended

Three Enforcement Modes

Mode Behavior
enforce Rejects pods that violate the policy
audit Logs violations in audit log but allows pod
warn Returns warning to user but allows pod

Workflow

Step 1: Label Namespaces for PSA

# Restricted namespace - production workloads
apiVersion: v1
kind: Namespace
metadata:
  name: production
  labels:
    pod-security.kubernetes.io/enforce: restricted
    pod-security.kubernetes.io/enforce-version: latest
    pod-security.kubernetes.io/audit: restricted
    pod-security.kubernetes.io/audit-version: latest
    pod-security.kubernetes.io/warn: restricted
    pod-security.kubernetes.io/warn-version: latest
# Baseline namespace - general workloads
apiVersion: v1
kind: Namespace
metadata:
  name: staging
  labels:
    pod-security.kubernetes.io/enforce: baseline
    pod-security.kubernetes.io/enforce-version: latest
    pod-security.kubernetes.io/audit: restricted
    pod-security.kubernetes.io/audit-version: latest
    pod-security.kubernetes.io/warn: restricted
    pod-security.kubernetes.io/warn-version: latest
# Privileged namespace - system components only
apiVersion: v1
kind: Namespace
metadata:
  name: kube-system
  labels:
    pod-security.kubernetes.io/enforce: privileged
    pod-security.kubernetes.io/enforce-version: latest

Step 2: Apply Labels to Existing Namespaces

# Apply restricted enforcement to production
kubectl label namespace production \
  pod-security.kubernetes.io/enforce=restricted \
  pod-security.kubernetes.io/audit=restricted \
  pod-security.kubernetes.io/warn=restricted \
  --overwrite

# Apply baseline to staging with restricted warnings
kubectl label namespace staging \
  pod-security.kubernetes.io/enforce=baseline \
  pod-security.kubernetes.io/audit=restricted \
  pod-security.kubernetes.io/warn=restricted \
  --overwrite

# Check labels on all namespaces
kubectl get namespaces -L pod-security.kubernetes.io/enforce

Step 3: Create Compliant Pod Specs

# Restricted-compliant deployment
apiVersion: apps/v1
kind: Deployment
metadata:
  name: secure-app
  namespace: production
spec:
  replicas: 3
  selector:
    matchLabels:
      app: secure-app
  template:
    metadata:
      labels:
        app: secure-app
    spec:
      automountServiceAccountToken: false
      securityContext:
        runAsNonRoot: true
        runAsUser: 65534
        runAsGroup: 65534
        fsGroup: 65534
        seccompProfile:
          type: RuntimeDefault
      containers:
        - name: app
          image: myregistry.com/myapp:v1.0.0@sha256:abc123
          ports:
            - containerPort: 8080
              protocol: TCP
          securityContext:
            allowPrivilegeEscalation: false
            readOnlyRootFilesystem: true
            capabilities:
              drop:
                - ALL
            runAsNonRoot: true
            runAsUser: 65534
          resources:
            requests:
              memory: "64Mi"
              cpu: "100m"
            limits:
              memory: "256Mi"
              cpu: "500m"
          volumeMounts:
            - name: tmp
              mountPath: /tmp
            - name: cache
              mountPath: /var/cache
      volumes:
        - name: tmp
          emptyDir:
            sizeLimit: 100Mi
        - name: cache
          emptyDir:
            sizeLimit: 50Mi

Step 4: Gradual Migration Strategy

# Phase 1: Audit mode - discover violations without blocking
kubectl label namespace my-namespace \
  pod-security.kubernetes.io/audit=restricted \
  pod-security.kubernetes.io/warn=restricted

# Check audit logs for violations
kubectl logs -n kube-system -l component=kube-apiserver | grep "pod-security"

# Phase 2: Enforce baseline, warn on restricted
kubectl label namespace my-namespace \
  pod-security.kubernetes.io/enforce=baseline \
  pod-security.kubernetes.io/warn=restricted \
  --overwrite

# Phase 3: Full restricted enforcement
kubectl label namespace my-namespace \
  pod-security.kubernetes.io/enforce=restricted \
  --overwrite

Step 5: Dry-Run Enforcement Testing

# Test what would happen with restricted enforcement
kubectl label --dry-run=server --overwrite namespace my-namespace \
  pod-security.kubernetes.io/enforce=restricted

# Example output:
# Warning: existing pods in namespace "my-namespace" violate the new
# PodSecurity enforce level "restricted:latest"
# Warning: nginx-xxx: allowPrivilegeEscalation != false,
#   unrestricted capabilities, runAsNonRoot != true, seccompProfile

Baseline Profile Restrictions

Control Restricted Requirement
HostProcess Must not set Pods cannot use Windows HostProcess
Host Namespaces Must not set No hostNetwork, hostPID, hostIPC
Privileged Must not set No privileged: true
Capabilities Baseline list only Only NET_BIND_SERVICE, drop ALL for restricted
HostPath Volumes Must not use No hostPath volume mounts
Host Ports Must not use No hostPort in container spec
AppArmor Default/runtime Cannot set to unconfined
SELinux Limited types Only container_t, container_init_t, container_kvm_t
/proc Mount Type Default only Must use Default proc mount
Seccomp RuntimeDefault or Localhost Must specify seccomp profile (restricted)
Sysctls Safe set only Limited to safe sysctls

Validation Commands

# Verify namespace labels
kubectl get ns --show-labels | grep pod-security

# Test pod creation against policy
kubectl run test-pod --image=nginx --namespace=production --dry-run=server

# Check for violations in audit logs
kubectl get events --field-selector reason=FailedCreate -A

# Scan with Kubescape for PSS compliance
kubescape scan framework nsa --namespace production

References

04 同仓库更多 Skills

mukul975
mukul975/Anthropic-Cybersecurity-Skills

verifying-build-provenance-with-slsa-sigstore

Verifies artifact signatures and SLSA provenance using Sigstore's cosign (verify, verify-attestation, verify-blob-attestation) and slsa-verifier (verify-artifact), enforcing keyless OIDC builder identity and source repo against SLSA Build levels. Use in CI/CD before deploying artifacts, when consuming third-party attestations, establishing a SLSA Build L3 pipeline, or confirming provenance during incident response or admission control.

Skill与智能体开发
★ 3.6w
mukul975
mukul975/Anthropic-Cybersecurity-Skills

validating-tpm-measured-boot-attestation

Verifies TPM 2.0 measured-boot integrity and remote attestation with tpm2-tools -- reading PCRs (tpm2_pcrread), replaying the boot event log, generating and checking signed quotes (tpm2_quote/tpm2_checkquote), and sealing secrets to a PCR policy. Use to confirm a system booted trusted firmware/kernel for Zero Trust device posture, detect boot-chain tampering via PCR drift, or build a golden-value baseline for fleet attestation.

Skill与智能体开发
★ 3.6w
mukul975
mukul975/Anthropic-Cybersecurity-Skills

validating-backup-integrity-for-recovery

Validates backup integrity through cryptographic hash verification, automated restore testing, corruption detection, and recoverability checks to confirm backups are reliable for disaster recovery and ransomware response. Use before relying on backups for recovery, when building post-backup validation pipelines, auditing backup infrastructure for compliance, or checking immutable/air-gapped backups for silent corruption or tampering.

测试与质量Skill与智能体开发
★ 3.6w
mukul975
mukul975/Anthropic-Cybersecurity-Skills

triaging-windows-with-kape

Runs KAPE (Kroll Artifact Parser and Extractor) to collect targeted forensic artifacts (registry hives, $MFT, event logs, prefetch, browser data) via Targets and parse them with Modules wrapping Eric Zimmerman's EZ Tools (PECmd, MFTECmd, RECmd). Use during early incident containment/triage when full disk imaging is impractical but a defensible, parseable Windows artifact set is needed quickly, including at-scale remote collection.

Skill与智能体开发
★ 3.6w
mukul975
mukul975/Anthropic-Cybersecurity-Skills

triaging-vulnerabilities-with-ssvc-framework

Triages and prioritizes vulnerabilities with CISA's Stakeholder-Specific Vulnerability Categorization (SSVC) decision tree, weighing exploitation status (via the CISA KEV catalog and FIRST EPSS API), technical impact, automatability, and mission prevalence to output Track/Track*/Attend/Act decisions. Use when prioritizing vulnerability scan results (OpenVAS, Nessus, Qualys) for remediation planning beyond raw CVSS scores.

Skill与智能体开发
★ 3.6w
mukul975
mukul975/Anthropic-Cybersecurity-Skills

triaging-security-incident

Performs initial triage of security incidents using the NIST SP 800-61r3 and SANS PICERL frameworks, classifying incident type, assigning priority by business impact, and routing to the appropriate response team. Use when a SIEM/EDR alert needs human classification, concurrent alerts must be prioritized, or a user report or threat-intel IOC match requires initial incident categorization.

Skill与智能体开发
★ 3.6w