Admission policy misses a supported object or update path
A tenant can persist an object prohibited by the advertised admission policy through a missed operation, selector or subresource.
Candidate CWE: CWE-863
Test hypothesis#
Use a permitted manifest as the positive control. In a disposable cluster, compare a harmless policy-violating fixture on the normal create path and the equivalent supported alternate operation; inspect the final persisted object.
Evidence required#
Policy version and match rules, paired admission responses, caller identity and final object demonstrating the missed restriction.
Rule out false positives#
Warn/audit-only policies, intentional exceptions, dry-run rejection misread as persistence, or no demonstrated security effect beyond formatting differences.
Playbook and command references#
- Container and Kubernetes isolation — Test RBAC, workload identity, admission, networking and host exposure as separate enforcement layers.
Find the associated command snippets
Referenced by these target playbooks#
Report checklist#
- Capture the affected version, configuration, identities, and object ownership.
- Preserve a valid baseline and a negative control.
- Reproduce the forbidden data access, action, or state change on controlled fixtures.
- Explain the intended security rule and why the observed behavior violates it.
- State prerequisites, uncertainty, cleanup, and the smallest demonstrated impact.
Conditional ATT&CK mapping#
No direct ATT&CK mapping selected. Record the weakness and demonstrated impact without forcing an adversary-behavior classification. See the mapping guide.