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

CoreDNS default image bump to 1.6.6 to resolve CVE #8333

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Jan 27, 2020

Conversation

gjtempleton
Copy link
Member

@gjtempleton gjtempleton commented Jan 14, 2020

Also updates the default Corefile config to make use of the new lameduck functionality for healthcheck: https://coredns.io/plugins/health/ as per kubeADM: kubernetes/kubernetes#86260

Builds on top of the work done by @michalschott in #7883 however updates the image for all clusters.

Resolves #8332
Resolves #8309

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. size/S Denotes a PR that changes 10-29 lines, ignoring generated files. labels Jan 14, 2020
@mikesplain
Copy link
Contributor

This mostly looks good. You probably also want to bump the versions here:

version := "1.3.1-kops.5"
and here:
version := "1.3.1-kops.5"
Those aren't really required anymore but I think it's good for cleanliness of existing deployments and code.

Also updates the default corefile config to make use of the new lameduck functionality for healthcheck
@gjtempleton
Copy link
Member Author

Good point, have updated as suggested.

@joshbranham
Copy link
Contributor

Do we care about the version of CoreDNS as it pertains to K8s version? I know we had a PR a while back we chose not to merge (I think) because the version was ahead of what k/k was using?

@hakman
Copy link
Member

hakman commented Jan 14, 2020

Do we care about the version of CoreDNS as it pertains to K8s version? I know we had a PR a while back we chose not to merge (I think) because the version was ahead of what k/k was using?

Good point @joshbranham. The bump to 1.6.x should happen for 1.16+. As discussed in Slack, Kubeadm uses 1.3.x up to Kubernetes 1.15 and 1.6.x for Kubernetes 1.16+

We should also cherrypick this for 1.15+.

@mikesplain
Copy link
Contributor

As discussed during office hours, lets check with @rajansandeep who has previously be in the know with CoreDNS.

Should we consider backporting 1.6.* to k8s 1.15 regardless of what k/k is doing @rajansandeep?

@michalschott
Copy link
Contributor

My three cents, I'd keep CoreDNS to whatever version is suggested to certain version (aka keep 1.3.1 for <= 1.15 and bump to 1.6.X for > 1.16).

@thomaspeitz
Copy link
Contributor

Thanks for your PR @gjtempleton

We are applying your change manually currently. During git diff @kforsthoevel and I found this small issue:

# Workaround for 1.3.1 bug, can be removed after bumping to 1.4+. See: https://github.com/coredns/coredns/pull/2529
- There is still the volume definition in there. You only removed the mounting. From my perspective we should remove the definition as well.

Beside that i really would enjoy a merge of it. Having a CVE in the cluster sounds awful.

Backstory:
We are upgrading to 1.6.6 mainly because we have dns issues since upgrading from 1.14 to 1.15 and want to verify if this solves it. It happens during node exchange.

@gjtempleton
Copy link
Member Author

Hey @thomaspeitz !

Good catch, thanks. I've just pushed up a commit to remove that as well, hadn't noticed as we're running the CA ignoring local storage.

@justinsb
Copy link
Member

AFAICT k/k is going to move to 1.6.6 (I haven't seen any objections), and we probably shouldn't have a CVE in the default versions that kops installs, which trumps our "don't change behaviour of old versions" rule. Ideally CoreDNS (and all addons) would backport CVE fixes so we could just bump the patch for older k8s versions, but nobody is doing that (yet!) to my knowledge.

/approve
/lgtm

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Jan 27, 2020
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: gjtempleton, justinsb

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Jan 27, 2020
@justinsb
Copy link
Member

(I suspect e2e will actually fail because of the skew issue that may be fixed in kubernetes/test-infra#16029 )

@johngmyers
Copy link
Member

/test pull-kops-e2e-kubernetes-aws

1 similar comment
@johngmyers
Copy link
Member

/test pull-kops-e2e-kubernetes-aws

k8s-ci-robot added a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 27, 2020
…33-upstream-release-1.17

Automated cherry pick of #8333: CoreDNS default image bump to 1.6.6
k8s-ci-robot added a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 27, 2020
…pstream-release-1.15

Automated cherry pick of #8333: CoreDNS default image bump to 1.6.6
k8s-ci-robot added a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 27, 2020
…33-upstream-release-1.16

Automated cherry pick of #8333: CoreDNS default image bump to 1.6.6
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. size/S Denotes a PR that changes 10-29 lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

CoreDNS CVE - CVE-2019-19794 CoreDNS v1.3.1 emptyDir workaround blocks node draining
9 participants