You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Description: I would like to apply a default security policy, e.g. on gateway level, and opt-out from this policy for specific routes.
Example: I have a set of HTTP routes and all of them should be secured, e.g. via basic auth. This works well by applying a security policy on gateway level. Now, for a single HTTP route, I would like to opt-out from this policy and make it available without any security policy
My current solution ideas:
Create another listener on the gateway, apply the default security policy to a specific listener via sectionName -> this is not supported for security policies yet
Create a separate gateway -> while this works, it has some implications, e.g. additional pods and services (LoadBalancers)
Use label selectors to target only routes with specific labels -> this is an opt-in solution, but does not create a "secure-by-default" situation
Is there another way to accomplish it? Am I missing something? If not, as far as I see, either adding an exclusive or negated matchLabels on targetSelectors or adding support for sectionName in targetRefs would resolve my request.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
@arkodg yes, that does indeed work! Nice catch, that helps a lot, thanks!
As this behaviour is not documented (at least I couldn't find it), can I rely on it to work in the future? Should this behaviour be added to the documentation?
Description: I would like to apply a default security policy, e.g. on gateway level, and opt-out from this policy for specific routes.
Example: I have a set of HTTP routes and all of them should be secured, e.g. via basic auth. This works well by applying a security policy on gateway level. Now, for a single HTTP route, I would like to opt-out from this policy and make it available without any security policy
My current solution ideas:
Is there another way to accomplish it? Am I missing something? If not, as far as I see, either adding an exclusive or negated matchLabels on targetSelectors or adding support for sectionName in targetRefs would resolve my request.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: