Skip to content

Document the actual RBAC permissions required and the minimalRBAC helm chart value #3323

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

Merged

Conversation

laverya
Copy link
Member

@laverya laverya commented Jun 18, 2025

Document what RBAC rules are actually required for the SDK to function

Also document the new minimalRBAC helm chart value and how it functions, complete with generated RBAC role examples

Copy link

netlify bot commented Jun 18, 2025

Deploy Preview for replicated-docs ready!

Name Link
🔨 Latest commit d24a1fc
🔍 Latest deploy log https://app.netlify.com/projects/replicated-docs/deploys/6855c1c422c8c50008a026c1
😎 Deploy Preview https://deploy-preview-3323--replicated-docs.netlify.app
📱 Preview on mobile
Toggle QR Code...

QR Code

Use your smartphone camera to open QR code link.

To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify project configuration.

Copy link

netlify bot commented Jun 18, 2025

Deploy Preview for replicated-docs-upgrade ready!

Name Link
🔨 Latest commit d24a1fc
🔍 Latest deploy log https://app.netlify.com/projects/replicated-docs-upgrade/deploys/6855c1c422c8c50008a026c3
😎 Deploy Preview https://deploy-preview-3323--replicated-docs-upgrade.netlify.app
📱 Preview on mobile
Toggle QR Code...

QR Code

Use your smartphone camera to open QR code link.

To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify project configuration.

@replicated-ci replicated-ci added type::docs Improvements or additions to documentation type::feature labels Jun 18, 2025
@laverya laverya changed the title expand the required set of permissions for minimal RBAC Document the actual RBAC permissions required and the minimalRBAC helm chart value Jun 18, 2025
@laverya
Copy link
Member Author

laverya commented Jun 18, 2025

https://deploy-preview-3323--replicated-docs-upgrade.netlify.app/vendor/replicated-sdk-customizing#minimal-rbac

These RBAC examples are pretty long... but we have buttons to skip to the next section

@laverya laverya marked this pull request as ready for review June 18, 2025 23:12
@laverya laverya requested a review from a team as a code owner June 18, 2025 23:12
@paigecalvert paigecalvert force-pushed the laverya/sc-124993/reduce-permissions-for-the-replicated-sdk branch from ce14c9e to 58d5578 Compare June 20, 2025 19:17
@@ -8,9 +8,264 @@ For information about how to use a custom domain for the Replicated SDK image, s

This section describes role-based access control (RBAC) for the Replicated SDK, including the default RBAC, minimum RBAC requirements, and how to install the SDK with custom RBAC.

### Default RBAC
It also describes how to enable the `replicated.minimalRBAC` field to use a less-permissive default RBAC role for the Replicated SDK version 1.7.0 and later.
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

New structure of custom rbac section:

Customize RBAC for the SDK
---Enable Minimal RBAC
---Default RBAC (minimalRBAC: true)
------ Default minimalRBAC Role Without Custom Status Informers
------ Default minimalRBAC Role With Custom Status Informers
---Default RBAC (minimalRBAC: false)
--- Install the SDK with Custom RBAC
------ Minimum RBAC Requirements
------ Use a Custom ServiceAccount
------ Use a Custom ClusterRole

@laverya laverya merged commit 2039cb7 into main Jun 20, 2025
5 checks passed
@laverya laverya deleted the laverya/sc-124993/reduce-permissions-for-the-replicated-sdk branch June 20, 2025 20:31
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
type::docs Improvements or additions to documentation type::feature
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants