Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

AKS Uses Azure Policies Add-On Disabled && AKS RBAC Disabled - azurerm 3.0 #5453

Closed
gherasim-learn opened this issue Jun 8, 2022 Discussed in #5452 · 2 comments · Fixed by #5661
Closed

AKS Uses Azure Policies Add-On Disabled && AKS RBAC Disabled - azurerm 3.0 #5453

gherasim-learn opened this issue Jun 8, 2022 Discussed in #5452 · 2 comments · Fixed by #5661
Labels
community Community contribution feature request Community: new feature request

Comments

@gherasim-learn
Copy link

Discussed in #5452

Originally posted by gherasim-learn June 8, 2022
I upgraded the azurerm provider (terraform) from 2.73.0 to 3.9.0.
There were some changes described in the upgrade guide: https://registry.terraform.io/providers/hashicorp/azurerm/latest/docs/guides/3.0-upgrade-guide

After updating the terraform code, KICS scan started to rapport two findings:
image
and
image

my cluster definition looks like that:
image
Did I do something wrong or is it a problem with KICS?

@eXXL
Copy link

eXXL commented Jun 8, 2022

I have the same issue. It looks to me that the related KICS queries have not been adjusted to the updated syntax of the terraform resources.

@rafaela-soares rafaela-soares added the community Community contribution label Jun 8, 2022
@rafaela-soares rafaela-soares added the feature request Community: new feature request label Jun 27, 2022
@rafaela-soares
Copy link
Contributor

Hello everyone!

@gherasim-learn, thank you so much for bringing this matter!

@eXXL is right, we did not adjust to the updated syntax of the terraform resources yet. We apologize for that. It is something that we will try to slot more time!

Fortunately, @rndmh3ro adjusted both queries in PRs #5652 and #5661.

Thank you so much all of you for being attentive to this question! We appreciate a lot!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
community Community contribution feature request Community: new feature request
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

3 participants