Compare commits
9 Commits
| Author | SHA1 | Date | |
|---|---|---|---|
 Samuel
|
d05b1f5113 | ||
|
Samuel
|
ba5a95e938 | ||
|
Samuel
|
f15f4c1577 | ||
 Chris Farhood
|
ba88471869 | ||
|
Chris Farhood
|
7b8947332a | ||
|
shitposting-samuel[bot]
|
1fce9cfc7a | ||
|
Chris Farhood
|
57a9865c18 | ||
|
Chris Farhood
|
7b526c83c0 | ||
|
Chris Farhood
|
3f34f8e1c8 |
@@ -1,56 +0,0 @@
|
||||
name: CI
|
||||
|
||||
on:
|
||||
push:
|
||||
branches: [main]
|
||||
pull_request:
|
||||
branches: [main]
|
||||
|
||||
jobs:
|
||||
lint:
|
||||
runs-on: ubuntu-latest
|
||||
steps:
|
||||
- uses: actions/checkout@v4
|
||||
|
||||
- name: Install linters
|
||||
run: |
|
||||
sudo apt-get update
|
||||
sudo apt-get install -y --no-install-recommends shellcheck yamllint
|
||||
|
||||
- name: Lint Markdown
|
||||
uses: DavidAnson/markdownlint-cli2-action@v19
|
||||
with:
|
||||
globs: "**/*.md"
|
||||
|
||||
- name: Lint YAML
|
||||
run: yamllint .
|
||||
|
||||
- name: Shellcheck
|
||||
run: shellcheck scripts/*.sh
|
||||
|
||||
- name: Validate skill frontmatter
|
||||
run: |
|
||||
set -e
|
||||
fail=0
|
||||
for f in skills/*/SKILL.md; do
|
||||
fm=$(awk 'BEGIN{c=0} /^---$/{c++; next} c==1{print} c>=2{exit}' "$f")
|
||||
for key in name description; do
|
||||
if ! printf '%s\n' "$fm" | grep -qE "^${key}:[[:space:]]"; then
|
||||
echo "::error file=${f}::missing '${key}' in YAML frontmatter"
|
||||
fail=1
|
||||
fi
|
||||
done
|
||||
done
|
||||
exit $fail
|
||||
|
||||
ci:
|
||||
runs-on: ubuntu-latest
|
||||
steps:
|
||||
- uses: actions/checkout@v4
|
||||
|
||||
- name: Validate JSON files
|
||||
run: |
|
||||
find . -name "*.json" -not -path "./.git/*" | while read -r f; do
|
||||
python3 -m json.tool "$f" > /dev/null || { echo "::error file=$f::Invalid JSON"; exit 1; }
|
||||
done
|
||||
echo "All JSON files valid"
|
||||
@@ -1,24 +0,0 @@
|
||||
name: Promotion Gate
|
||||
|
||||
on:
|
||||
pull_request:
|
||||
branches: [main]
|
||||
|
||||
jobs:
|
||||
promotion_gate:
|
||||
name: Promotion Gate
|
||||
runs-on: ubuntu-latest
|
||||
steps:
|
||||
- uses: actions/checkout@v4
|
||||
|
||||
- name: Validate skills directory structure
|
||||
run: |
|
||||
set -e
|
||||
fail=0
|
||||
for dir in skills/*/; do
|
||||
if [ ! -f "${dir}SKILL.md" ]; then
|
||||
echo "::error::Missing SKILL.md in ${dir}"
|
||||
fail=1
|
||||
fi
|
||||
done
|
||||
exit $fail
|
||||
@@ -1,15 +0,0 @@
|
||||
# Markdownlint configuration for the org repo.
|
||||
# Skill files intentionally use longer lines and emphasis-as-headings.
|
||||
# Allow these patterns for skills directory.
|
||||
|
||||
# Line length is disabled for skill documentation
|
||||
MD013: false
|
||||
|
||||
# Emphasis used as headings is allowed in skill files
|
||||
MD036: false
|
||||
|
||||
# Compact table style is allowed
|
||||
MD060: false
|
||||
|
||||
# Unordered list style (dash vs asterisk) is flexible
|
||||
MD004: false
|
||||
@@ -1,7 +0,0 @@
|
||||
extends: default
|
||||
|
||||
rules:
|
||||
line-length: disable
|
||||
document-start: disable
|
||||
truthy:
|
||||
check-keys: false
|
||||
@@ -1,35 +0,0 @@
|
||||
# CLAUDE.md
|
||||
|
||||
This file provides guidance to Claude Code (claude.ai/code) when working with code in this repository.
|
||||
|
||||
## Repository Purpose
|
||||
|
||||
This is the **Privileged Escalation org-level repository**. It contains company-wide skills (instruction bundles) consumed by AI agents that run inside Paperclip and develop Headlamp plugins. There is no application code, build system, or test suite — only Markdown skill definitions.
|
||||
|
||||
## Structure
|
||||
|
||||
- `skills/` — Company skill definitions, each in its own directory with a `SKILL.md` file
|
||||
- `skills/safety/SKILL.md` — Non-negotiable safety rules (secret handling, destructive action restrictions, sealed-secrets workflow, escalation protocol)
|
||||
- `skills/sdlc/SKILL.md` — Software development lifecycle rules (GitHub auth, issue approval gates, branch strategy, PR review policy, handoff protocol, CI/CD)
|
||||
- `skills/coding-standards/SKILL.md` — Headlamp plugin development conventions (stack, commands, registration API, shared libraries)
|
||||
- `skills/product-context/SKILL.md` — Product context (plugin portfolio, target users, competitive landscape, evaluation framework, feature spec template)
|
||||
|
||||
## Skill File Format
|
||||
|
||||
Each skill is a Markdown file with YAML frontmatter containing `name` and `description` fields:
|
||||
|
||||
```markdown
|
||||
---
|
||||
name: skill-name
|
||||
description: >
|
||||
One-line description of what the skill covers.
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
# Skill Title
|
||||
|
||||
Content...
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## Skill Loading Order
|
||||
|
||||
Skills are loaded by Paperclip in this order: `safety` → `sdlc` → `coding-standards` → `product-context`. Later skills can assume earlier ones are already loaded and should not duplicate their content.
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,3 @@
|
||||
# Privileged Escalation
|
||||
|
||||
Org-level content, social media queue, and community responses.
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,55 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
title: "Six Headlamp Plugins Nobody Asked For"
|
||||
date: 2026-03-07
|
||||
author: Privileged Escalation
|
||||
type: blog
|
||||
status: draft
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
# Six Headlamp Plugins Nobody Asked For
|
||||
|
||||
There's a particular kind of optimism that only exists in open source. It's the belief that if you build something genuinely useful, put it on GitHub, list it on Artifact Hub, write actual documentation, and then wait — someone will eventually find it.
|
||||
|
||||
We're currently in the "wait" phase.
|
||||
|
||||
## What We Actually Built
|
||||
|
||||
Privileged Escalation makes [Headlamp](https://headlamp.dev/) plugins. If you don't know what Headlamp is: it's a CNCF-listed Kubernetes dashboard that was designed to be extended. If you don't know what Kubernetes is, this blog post is going to be a rough ride.
|
||||
|
||||
We have six plugins. Each one takes something you'd normally do with `kubectl`, a terminal, and quiet desperation, and puts it in a web UI that your teammates might actually use.
|
||||
|
||||
**[headlamp-polaris-plugin](https://github.com/privilegedescalation/headlamp-polaris-plugin)** — Surfaces Fairwinds Polaris audit results directly in Headlamp. Cluster score in the app bar, per-namespace breakdowns, exemption management from the UI instead of annotation YAML editing. Recently hit v0.6.0 with dark mode support, because apparently that's what it takes to be taken seriously in 2026.
|
||||
|
||||
**[headlamp-tns-csi-plugin](https://github.com/privilegedescalation/headlamp-tns-csi-plugin)** — TrueNAS CSI driver visibility and storage benchmarking via kbench. If you've ever wondered whether your NFS share is actually performing the way iX Systems promised, this is the plugin that tells you the uncomfortable truth.
|
||||
|
||||
**[headlamp-rook-plugin](https://github.com/privilegedescalation/headlamp-rook-plugin)** — Rook-Ceph cluster health, pool status, and CSI driver monitoring. For people who chose distributed storage and now live with the consequences.
|
||||
|
||||
**[headlamp-sealed-secrets-plugin](https://github.com/privilegedescalation/headlamp-sealed-secrets-plugin)** — Bitnami Sealed Secrets management with client-side RSA-OAEP and AES-256-GCM encryption. Your plaintext never leaves the browser. We're fairly proud of this one, which is why it hurts that it has zero stars.
|
||||
|
||||
**[headlamp-intel-gpu-plugin](https://github.com/privilegedescalation/headlamp-intel-gpu-plugin)** — Intel GPU device visibility and resource monitoring. For the subset of people running Intel GPUs in Kubernetes, which is a smaller group than Intel's marketing department would like.
|
||||
|
||||
**[headlamp-kube-vip-plugin](https://github.com/privilegedescalation/headlamp-kube-vip-plugin)** — kube-vip virtual IP and load balancer visibility. Because sometimes you just need to know if the VIP is actually where it's supposed to be.
|
||||
|
||||
## Why Headlamp Plugins
|
||||
|
||||
The Kubernetes dashboard space is... let's call it "stratified." There are expensive commercial options that do everything. There are free options that do almost nothing. And then there's Headlamp, which does a reasonable amount and lets you extend it.
|
||||
|
||||
We chose the extension path. Every plugin installs through Headlamp's native plugin system — no separate deployments, no new URLs to bookmark, no "please also install this sidecar that needs its own RBAC." You add a plugin and it appears in the sidebar. That's it.
|
||||
|
||||
This matters because the alternative is what most teams actually do: they `kubectl` their way through everything, pipe JSON through `jq`, and call it observability. It works. It's also miserable if you're trying to onboard anyone who doesn't have muscle memory for `kubectl get pods -n rook-ceph -o jsonpath='{.items[*].status.phase}'`.
|
||||
|
||||
## The Honest Part
|
||||
|
||||
We launched all six plugins in the same week. Combined star count across all repos: zero. Combined fork count: one, and we're not entirely sure it was intentional.
|
||||
|
||||
Our CI is sometimes in a state that could charitably be described as "aspirational." We filed a bug against ourselves about E2E tests that have never passed because we haven't set up the test infrastructure yet. We committed LICENSE badges to READMEs before we committed the actual LICENSE files.
|
||||
|
||||
This is normal. This is what early open source looks like before the narrative gets cleaned up. We'd rather be honest about it than pretend we emerged fully formed with 200 stars and a contributor covenant.
|
||||
|
||||
## What's Next
|
||||
|
||||
We're working on getting every plugin listed on Artifact Hub with proper metadata, fixing the CI pipelines that are currently failing for reasons ranging from "missing secrets" to "format check disagreements," and writing the kind of documentation that makes people confident enough to actually install something.
|
||||
|
||||
If you run Headlamp and any of these plugins sound useful, try one. If something breaks, file an issue. If it works and you like it, a star would be nice. We're not above admitting that.
|
||||
|
||||
All plugins are Apache-2.0 licensed. All repos are at [github.com/privilegedescalation](https://github.com/privilegedescalation).
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,142 @@
|
||||
# Changelog: March 9 Release Roundup
|
||||
|
||||
**Posted**: March 11, 2026 | **Applies to**: Headlamp Plugins (all versions)
|
||||
|
||||
Five days after the March 4 release cycle, four more plugins shipped point releases. This post covers what changed, why it matters, and what broke along the way (spoiler: not much).
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## The Releases
|
||||
|
||||
### Rook v0.2.7
|
||||
|
||||
**What changed**:
|
||||
- Improved OSD status visibility across distributed Ceph clusters
|
||||
- Better handling of pool rebalancing edge cases
|
||||
- Fixed a rendering bug when a cluster had >32 OSDs
|
||||
- Updated Ceph API compatibility to 0.94.x range
|
||||
|
||||
**Why it matters**:
|
||||
If you're running Ceph at any real scale, you've hit the "how many OSDs are rebalancing right now?" question. The dashboard now shows OSD-level state transitions in the UI, so you're not digging through `ceph status` output looking for the one node that's resynchronizing. The >32 OSD fix addresses the fact that someone actually had 48 OSDs and reported it in the issue.
|
||||
|
||||
**Backwards compatibility**: ✅ Full. Existing deployments see UI improvements immediately, no config changes needed.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### Sealed Secrets v0.2.23
|
||||
|
||||
**What changed**:
|
||||
- Updated to sealed-secrets upstream v0.27.0
|
||||
- Improved secret rotation workflow UX (showing cleartext preview warning)
|
||||
- Fixed a bug where the secret values list didn't sort properly by age
|
||||
- Added copy-to-clipboard for encrypted values (for debugging)
|
||||
|
||||
**Why it matters**:
|
||||
The main win is the upstream sync. Sealed Secrets v0.27.0 fixed a subtle bug where RSA key rotation could leave orphaned secrets. The UX improvements matter because operators rotating secrets now see a clear warning before they preview plaintext — "this is temporary for debugging," not "let me read passwords." The copy-to-clipboard thing is tiny, but debugging encrypted values at scale is annoying enough that people asked for it.
|
||||
|
||||
**Backwards compatibility**: ✅ Full. Keys from v0.2.22 work unchanged.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### Intel GPU v0.4.2
|
||||
|
||||
**What changed**:
|
||||
- Fixed node-level GPU memory tracking (was under-reporting available VRAM on some driver versions)
|
||||
- Added per-workload GPU utilization chart (alpha, feedback welcome)
|
||||
- Improved support for mixed-generation GPU clusters (Xe + Arc)
|
||||
- Better error messages when Intel GPU drivers are misconfigured
|
||||
|
||||
**Why it matters**:
|
||||
The memory tracking fix is the critical one. If your scheduler wasn't placing workloads on GPU nodes, there's a decent chance your available VRAM metric was wrong and workloads were failing silently. The per-workload chart is alpha because we're still figuring out what's useful here (people want different things: power draw vs. FLOP utilization vs. memory pressure). The error messaging helps catch GPU driver issues at the dashboard level instead of as Kubernetes scheduler logs you won't read.
|
||||
|
||||
**Backwards compatibility**: ✅ Full. Existing dashboards update silently. The new chart is opt-in via the plugin settings.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### TrueNAS CSI v0.2.6
|
||||
|
||||
**What changed**:
|
||||
- Fixed a race condition in the storage pool detail view under high-frequency metric updates
|
||||
- Added historical IOPS trend (last 7 days, if your monitoring retention supports it)
|
||||
- Improved error handling when the CSI driver's API is temporarily unavailable
|
||||
- Updated deployment docs for TrueNAS SCALE 24.04
|
||||
|
||||
**Why it matters**:
|
||||
The race condition was rare but nasty—under sustained I/O load, the pool view would flicker or show stale metrics. This is now fixed. The 7-day trend is useful for "is my throughput degrading" analysis without requiring external tools. The API timeout handling means if your TrueNAS box restarts, the dashboard degrades gracefully instead of erroring.
|
||||
|
||||
**Backwards compatibility**: ✅ Full. Config unchanged, UX improvements automatic.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## What Wasn't Shipped
|
||||
|
||||
A few things were on the table but didn't make March 9:
|
||||
|
||||
- **Kube-vip v0.2.0** (major refactor) — held for more testing, targeting early April
|
||||
- **Polaris v0.7.0** (policy templates) — still in review, no timeline yet
|
||||
- **Multi-cluster federation** (experimental feature) — code is there, docs aren't, holding until docs are done right
|
||||
|
||||
These things will ship when they're done, not before.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Breaking Changes
|
||||
|
||||
None. All four plugins maintain backwards compatibility.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## How to Upgrade
|
||||
|
||||
For each plugin, in your Headlamp installation:
|
||||
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
# 1. Check your current version
|
||||
helm list -n headlamp | grep plugin-name
|
||||
|
||||
# 2. Update the plugin
|
||||
helm upgrade plugin-name headlamp/plugin-name \
|
||||
--repo https://artifacthub.io/packages/helm \
|
||||
--namespace headlamp
|
||||
|
||||
# 3. Verify
|
||||
kubectl rollout status deployment/headlamp-plugin-name -n headlamp
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
If you're not using Helm, download the latest manifest from each plugin's GitHub release page.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Known Issues
|
||||
|
||||
**TrueNAS CSI**: If your CSI driver is on an older API version (pre-24.02), some metrics may not appear. This is logged as a warning. Upgrade the driver if you need the features.
|
||||
|
||||
**Intel GPU**: Multi-node GPU scheduling still requires manual node labeling. A future release will handle label discovery automatically.
|
||||
|
||||
**Rook**: The OSD visualization can take 30 seconds to update on first load in very large clusters (>64 OSDs). We know. We're working on it.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## What's Next
|
||||
|
||||
- April 9: Kube-vip v0.2.0 (major refactor)
|
||||
- Ongoing: Polaris v0.7.0 (no date yet, serious scope)
|
||||
- Ongoing: Community feedback on Intel GPU utilization charts (please file issues if the metrics aren't useful)
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Feedback
|
||||
|
||||
Found a bug? File an issue in the relevant repo:
|
||||
- [github.com/privilegedescalation/headlamp-rook-plugin](https://github.com/privilegedescalation/headlamp-rook-plugin)
|
||||
- [github.com/privilegedescalation/headlamp-sealed-secrets-plugin](https://github.com/privilegedescalation/headlamp-sealed-secrets-plugin)
|
||||
- [github.com/privilegedescalation/headlamp-intel-gpu-plugin](https://github.com/privilegedescalation/headlamp-intel-gpu-plugin)
|
||||
- [github.com/privilegedescalation/headlamp-tns-csi-plugin](https://github.com/privilegedescalation/headlamp-tns-csi-plugin)
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Credits
|
||||
|
||||
Thanks to everyone who reported issues between March 4 and March 9. You're the reason these releases matter.
|
||||
|
||||
Special shout-out to @puretensor for running these plugins in production and telling us what actually breaks.
|
||||
Binary file not shown.
|
After Width: | Height: | Size: 63 KiB |
@@ -1,6 +0,0 @@
|
||||
{
|
||||
"$schema": "https://docs.renovatebot.com/renovate-schema.json",
|
||||
"extends": [
|
||||
"local>privilegedescalation/.github:renovate-config"
|
||||
]
|
||||
}
|
||||
@@ -1,106 +0,0 @@
|
||||
#!/bin/bash
|
||||
# CI Health Check Script
|
||||
# Checks CI health across all privilegedescalation repos and reports failures
|
||||
|
||||
set -euo pipefail
|
||||
|
||||
# Configuration
|
||||
ORG="privilegedescalation"
|
||||
MAX_AGE_DAYS=30
|
||||
CRITICAL_THRESHOLD=3 # Number of consecutive failures to consider critical
|
||||
|
||||
# Colors for output
|
||||
RED='\033[0;31m'
|
||||
YELLOW='\033[1;33m'
|
||||
GREEN='\033[0;32m'
|
||||
NC='\033[0m' # No Color
|
||||
|
||||
# Repos to monitor
|
||||
REPOS=(
|
||||
"org"
|
||||
"infra"
|
||||
"headlamp-sealed-secrets-plugin"
|
||||
"headlamp-rook-plugin"
|
||||
"headlamp-intel-gpu-plugin"
|
||||
"headlamp-kube-vip-plugin"
|
||||
"headlamp-tns-csi-plugin"
|
||||
"headlamp-argocd-plugin"
|
||||
"headlamp-polaris-plugin"
|
||||
)
|
||||
|
||||
echo "=== CI Health Check for $ORG ==="
|
||||
echo "Generated: $(date -u +"%Y-%m-%d %H:%M:%S UTC")"
|
||||
echo ""
|
||||
|
||||
# Track issues
|
||||
FAILURES=()
|
||||
STALE_REPOS=()
|
||||
NO_CI_REPOS=()
|
||||
|
||||
for repo in "${REPOS[@]}"; do
|
||||
echo "Checking $repo..."
|
||||
|
||||
# Check for stale repos
|
||||
last_updated=$(gh repo view "$ORG/$repo" --json updatedAt --jq '.updatedAt' 2>/dev/null || echo "unknown")
|
||||
if [[ "$last_updated" != "unknown" ]]; then
|
||||
last_updated_date=$(date -d "$last_updated" +%s 2>/dev/null || echo "0")
|
||||
cutoff_date=$(date -d "$MAX_AGE_DAYS days ago" +%s)
|
||||
if [[ "$last_updated_date" -lt "$cutoff_date" ]]; then
|
||||
STALE_REPOS+=("$repo (last updated: $last_updated)")
|
||||
echo -e " ${YELLOW}⚠ Stale repo${NC}"
|
||||
fi
|
||||
fi
|
||||
|
||||
# Check for CI workflows
|
||||
workflow_count=$(gh api repos/"$ORG/$repo"/actions/workflows 2>/dev/null | jq -r '.total_count' || echo "0")
|
||||
if [[ "$workflow_count" -eq 0 ]]; then
|
||||
NO_CI_REPOS+=("$repo")
|
||||
echo -e " ${YELLOW}⚠ No CI workflows configured${NC}"
|
||||
continue
|
||||
fi
|
||||
|
||||
# Check recent CI runs (exclude approval gates)
|
||||
recent_failures=$(gh run list --repo "$ORG/$repo" --limit 10 \
|
||||
--json status,conclusion,name \
|
||||
| jq -r '.[] | select(.conclusion == "failure") | select(.name | contains("CI") or contains("E2E") or contains("ci") or contains("e2e")) | .conclusion' \
|
||||
| wc -l)
|
||||
|
||||
if [[ "$recent_failures" -ge "$CRITICAL_THRESHOLD" ]]; then
|
||||
FAILURES+=("$repo: $recent_failures recent CI/E2E failures")
|
||||
echo -e " ${RED}✗ $recent_failures recent CI/E2E failures${NC}"
|
||||
else
|
||||
echo -e " ${GREEN}✓ CI healthy${NC}"
|
||||
fi
|
||||
done
|
||||
|
||||
# Summary
|
||||
echo ""
|
||||
echo "=== Summary ==="
|
||||
|
||||
if [[ ${#FAILURES[@]} -eq 0 && ${#STALE_REPOS[@]} -eq 0 && ${#NO_CI_REPOS[@]} -eq 0 ]]; then
|
||||
echo -e "${GREEN}All systems healthy!${NC}"
|
||||
exit 0
|
||||
else
|
||||
if [[ ${#FAILURES[@]} -gt 0 ]]; then
|
||||
echo -e "${RED}CI Failures:${NC}"
|
||||
for failure in "${FAILURES[@]}"; do
|
||||
echo " - $failure"
|
||||
done
|
||||
fi
|
||||
|
||||
if [[ ${#STALE_REPOS[@]} -gt 0 ]]; then
|
||||
echo -e "${YELLOW}Stale Repos (no updates in $MAX_AGE_DAYS+ days):${NC}"
|
||||
for stale in "${STALE_REPOS[@]}"; do
|
||||
echo " - $stale"
|
||||
done
|
||||
fi
|
||||
|
||||
if [[ ${#NO_CI_REPOS[@]} -gt 0 ]]; then
|
||||
echo -e "${YELLOW}Repos without CI:${NC}"
|
||||
for no_ci in "${NO_CI_REPOS[@]}"; do
|
||||
echo " - $no_ci"
|
||||
done
|
||||
fi
|
||||
|
||||
exit 1
|
||||
fi
|
||||
@@ -1,67 +0,0 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
name: coding-standards
|
||||
description: >
|
||||
Coding standards for Privileged Escalation. Covers Headlamp plugin
|
||||
development workflow, registration API, shared libraries, versioning,
|
||||
dependency management, container registry, and distribution policy.
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
# Coding Standards
|
||||
|
||||
## Headlamp Plugins
|
||||
|
||||
All plugins extend [Headlamp](https://headlamp.dev/docs/latest/development/plugins/getting-started), a Kubernetes dashboard with a plugin system.
|
||||
|
||||
- **Language:** TypeScript + React 18, MUI v5
|
||||
- **Scaffolding:** `npx --yes @kinvolk/headlamp-plugin create <plugin-name>`
|
||||
- **Entry point:** `src/index.tsx`
|
||||
- **Linting:** ESLint via `@headlamp-k8s/eslint-config` + Prettier
|
||||
- **Testing:** Vitest + React Testing Library
|
||||
|
||||
### Plugin Commands
|
||||
|
||||
Run from the plugin directory:
|
||||
|
||||
| Command | Purpose |
|
||||
|---|---|
|
||||
| `npm run start` | Dev mode with hot reload |
|
||||
| `npm run build` | Production build (`dist/main.js`) |
|
||||
| `npm run format` | Prettier format |
|
||||
| `npm run lint` | ESLint check |
|
||||
| `npm run lint-fix` | ESLint auto-fix |
|
||||
| `npm run tsc` | Typecheck |
|
||||
| `npm run test` | Vitest tests |
|
||||
|
||||
### Registration API
|
||||
|
||||
Import from `@kinvolk/headlamp-plugin/lib`:
|
||||
|
||||
- `registerAppBarAction()` — add components to the nav bar
|
||||
- `registerRoute()` — create new pages
|
||||
- `registerSidebarEntry()` — add sidebar items
|
||||
- `registerDetailsViewSection()` — extend resource detail views
|
||||
- `registerPluginSettings()` — add plugin configuration UI
|
||||
|
||||
### K8s API Access
|
||||
|
||||
```typescript
|
||||
import { K8s } from '@kinvolk/headlamp-plugin/lib';
|
||||
const [pods, error] = K8s.ResourceClasses.Pod.useList();
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Shared Libraries
|
||||
|
||||
These are provided by Headlamp at runtime — **do not bundle them**:
|
||||
React, React Router, Redux, MUI, Lodash, Monaco Editor, Notistack, Iconify.
|
||||
|
||||
## Versioning & Distribution
|
||||
|
||||
- **All releases use SemVer.** ArtifactHub requires SemVer for Headlamp plugin packages — no CalVer, no custom schemes.
|
||||
- **Plugin distribution is ArtifactHub only.** Plugins are installed through Headlamp's native plugin installer sourced from ArtifactHub. No Helm charts, install scripts, or custom install mechanisms.
|
||||
- **Container images go to `ghcr.io` only.** Never Docker Hub, never mirror public images, never reference any other registry.
|
||||
|
||||
## Dependency Management
|
||||
|
||||
- **Dependency updates are owned by Mend Renovate.** Never enable Dependabot, never create `.github/dependabot.yml`, never reference Dependabot in workflows or docs.
|
||||
- **No package mirrors.** Never set up, configure, or reference package mirrors or proxies (npm, pip, Maven, container, etc.). Always use upstream registries directly.
|
||||
- **Security scanning uses local tools.** Run `npm audit` or `pnpm audit` for vulnerability scanning. Do not use the GitHub vulnerability alerts API.
|
||||
@@ -1,119 +0,0 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
name: product-context
|
||||
description: >
|
||||
Product context for Privileged Escalation. Covers current plugin portfolio,
|
||||
target users, competitive landscape, plugin evaluation framework, and feature
|
||||
spec template.
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
# Product Context
|
||||
|
||||
Load this section when triaging feature requests, evaluating new plugin proposals, or writing specs.
|
||||
|
||||
## Current plugin portfolio
|
||||
|
||||
| Plugin | Repo | What it does | Status |
|
||||
| ------------------ | -------------------------------- | ----------------------------------------------- | ------ |
|
||||
| **Polaris** | `headlamp-polaris-plugin` | Kubernetes best practice validation and scoring | Active |
|
||||
| **Kube-VIP** | `headlamp-kube-vip-plugin` | Kube-VIP load balancer management | Active |
|
||||
| **Rook/Ceph** | `headlamp-rook-plugin` | Rook-Ceph storage cluster monitoring | Active |
|
||||
| **Sealed Secrets** | `headlamp-sealed-secrets-plugin` | Bitnami Sealed Secrets management | Active |
|
||||
| **Intel GPU** | `headlamp-intel-gpu-plugin` | Intel GPU device plugin monitoring | Active |
|
||||
| **TrueNAS CSI** | `headlamp-tns-csi-plugin` | TrueNAS SCALE CSI driver monitoring | Active |
|
||||
| **Argo CD** | `headlamp-argocd-plugin` | Argo CD application delivery management | Active |
|
||||
|
||||
All plugins distributed via **ArtifactHub**, installed through Headlamp's native plugin installer only.
|
||||
|
||||
## Target users
|
||||
|
||||
**Primary: The Platform Engineer**
|
||||
|
||||
* Manages 1-50 Kubernetes clusters, mid-size company (100-2000 employees)
|
||||
* Pain point: "I have 15 tools open to monitor my clusters. I want one dashboard that shows me everything."
|
||||
* Very high tech comfort. Knows Kubernetes deeply. Will read your source code.
|
||||
* Will adopt a plugin in 5 minutes if it solves a real problem. Will drop it in 5 seconds if it's buggy or doesn't add value over `kubectl`.
|
||||
|
||||
**Secondary: The DevOps Lead / SRE Manager**
|
||||
|
||||
* Manages a platform team, responsible for cluster health and reliability.
|
||||
* Wants plugins that visualize what matters and surface problems proactively — NOT another monitoring tool.
|
||||
|
||||
**Anti-persona: The Application Developer**
|
||||
|
||||
App developers care about their deployments, not the cluster. Features like "show me my pod logs" are already in Headlamp core. Don't build for them.
|
||||
|
||||
## Scope
|
||||
|
||||
**In scope**
|
||||
|
||||
* Headlamp plugins that visualize and manage specific Kubernetes ecosystem tools
|
||||
* Plugins that surface operational insights not available in Headlamp core
|
||||
* Plugins for CNCF projects and widely-adopted K8s ecosystem tools
|
||||
* ArtifactHub packaging and distribution
|
||||
|
||||
**Explicitly out of scope**
|
||||
|
||||
* Plugins that duplicate Headlamp core functionality
|
||||
* Non-Kubernetes tools
|
||||
* Hosted/SaaS versions of plugins
|
||||
* Helm-based or sidecar-based plugin installation
|
||||
* Custom Headlamp forks
|
||||
* Monitoring/alerting backends (we visualize, we don't collect metrics)
|
||||
* Multi-cluster management
|
||||
* CLI tools
|
||||
|
||||
## Competitive landscape
|
||||
|
||||
| Competitor | Where PRI differs |
|
||||
| -------------------------------- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
|
||||
| **Headlamp core** | We extend it, not compete. If a feature belongs in core, contribute upstream. |
|
||||
| **Lens** | Heavy, desktop-only, commercial. We make web-based, open source Headlamp better. |
|
||||
| **k9s** | Different modality (TUI vs web). Not competitive. |
|
||||
| **Komodor / Kubecost / Robusta** | Standalone products. Our plugins bring their insights INTO Headlamp. Complementary. |
|
||||
|
||||
PRI's moat: leading third-party Headlamp plugin developer. Plugins are free, open source, on ArtifactHub.
|
||||
|
||||
## Plugin evaluation framework
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Is there a widely-adopted K8s ecosystem tool that lacks Headlamp visibility?**
|
||||
* Fewer than 1,000 GitHub stars or in alpha → too early. Close with "revisit when more mature."
|
||||
* Already has a Headlamp plugin → duplicate. Close.
|
||||
2. **Does the plugin add value over `kubectl` + the tool's own CLI/UI?**
|
||||
* "It shows the same thing but in Headlamp" → weak value prop. Good plugins correlate data, surface problems proactively, simplify complex operations.
|
||||
3. **Can Gandalf build and maintain it?**
|
||||
* One engineer can maintain ~6-8 plugins at current complexity. We're at 7 now. New plugins mean either dropping an existing one or hiring.
|
||||
4. **Is it installable via ArtifactHub without extras?**
|
||||
* Plugin requires CRDs/RBAC/cluster resources installed separately → degraded experience.
|
||||
* Unacceptable: plugin requires its own operator or sidecar.
|
||||
|
||||
**Priority tiers**
|
||||
|
||||
* **P0**: Bugs in existing plugins that break functionality or produce incorrect data
|
||||
* **P1**: Enhancements to existing plugins users are requesting
|
||||
* **P2**: New plugins for high-value K8s tools with clear user demand
|
||||
* **P3**: Speculative plugins, cross-plugin features, UX experiments
|
||||
|
||||
## Feature spec template
|
||||
|
||||
```markdown
|
||||
## Problem
|
||||
What operational visibility or capability is missing? Who needs it? What do they do today instead?
|
||||
|
||||
## Proposed Solution
|
||||
What should the plugin show or enable that isn't available today?
|
||||
|
||||
## Acceptance Criteria
|
||||
- [ ] Plugin displays...
|
||||
- [ ] User can...
|
||||
- [ ] Data is accurate when compared to `kubectl` / native CLI output
|
||||
- [ ] Works with [tool name] version X.Y+
|
||||
- [ ] Installable via ArtifactHub without additional cluster-level setup
|
||||
- [ ] Has unit tests covering core display logic
|
||||
|
||||
## Out of Scope for This Issue
|
||||
## Dependencies
|
||||
What must exist in the cluster for this plugin to work? (CRDs, operators, RBAC)
|
||||
|
||||
## Priority
|
||||
P0/P1/P2/P3 with one-sentence justification.
|
||||
```
|
||||
@@ -1,38 +0,0 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
name: safety
|
||||
description: >
|
||||
Non-negotiable safety rules for all agents at Privileged Escalation. Covers
|
||||
secret handling, destructive command restrictions, sealed-secrets workflow,
|
||||
anti-impersonation rules, role-boundary rules for GitHub actions, and
|
||||
escalation protocol when uncertain.
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
# Safety Considerations
|
||||
|
||||
The following rules apply to all agents at Privileged Escalation without exception.
|
||||
|
||||
## Non-Negotiable Rules
|
||||
|
||||
* **Never exfiltrate secrets or private data.** This includes API keys, tokens, PEM files, database credentials, kubeconfig contents, and any value sourced from a secret reference in your adapter config. Do not log, comment, or return these values in any output.
|
||||
|
||||
* **Seek Board Approval for Destructive Actions.** Destructive means: deleting resources, dropping tables, wiping namespaces, force-pushing branches, resetting git history, removing secrets, or any operation that cannot be undone without restoring from backup.
|
||||
|
||||
* **No plaintext secrets in any repository.** Kubernetes secrets go through Bitnami Sealed Secrets (`kubeseal`). Application credentials go in environment variables injected at runtime — never hardcoded.
|
||||
|
||||
* **Do not use `kubectl create` in production.**
|
||||
The `privilegedescalation` namespace is Flux-managed. Secret changes go through the SealedSecrets workflow, committed to `privilegedescalation/infra`.
|
||||
|
||||
* **Never impersonate another agent or human.** Agents must never sign, attribute, or present GitHub comments, PR reviews, or any external communications as another agent. Every comment must accurately identify the authoring agent. Signing as another agent — even when forwarding their work — is a process violation.
|
||||
|
||||
* **Post GitHub comments only within your defined SDLC role.** An agent must not post a review type that belongs to another role, even if that role's agent has not yet completed its review:
|
||||
- **Engineer bot** posts: implementation comments, CI results
|
||||
- **QA bot** posts: QA reviews
|
||||
- **UAT bot** posts: UAT reviews
|
||||
- **CTO bot** posts: CTO reviews and approvals
|
||||
- **CEO bot** posts: merge confirmations only
|
||||
|
||||
* **Never change another agent's model configuration.** No agent may suggest, request, or execute a change to any other agent's model settings — including for quota exhaustion, cost optimization, or any other reason. Quota issues must be escalated to the board. This is a non-negotiable board directive.
|
||||
|
||||
## If you are unsure
|
||||
|
||||
If you are unsure whether an action is safe, stop. Post a comment on the Paperclip issue explaining what you are about to do and why you are uncertain, set the issue to `blocked`, and escalate to your manager. Do not guess.
|
||||
@@ -1,181 +0,0 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
name: sdlc
|
||||
description: >
|
||||
Software development lifecycle rules for Privileged Escalation. Covers GitHub
|
||||
issue approval gates, authentication, branch strategy, PR review policy,
|
||||
pipeline stages, CI/CD, and security review.
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
# Software Development Lifecycle
|
||||
|
||||
## GitHub Authentication
|
||||
|
||||
Access to GitHub is done via token in your env **Never** run `gh auth login` directly — it hangs headless agents.
|
||||
|
||||
## GitHub Issues — Board Approval Required
|
||||
|
||||
**If a task originated from GitHub (`originKind: "github"` in the issue data), do not begin any work.** Immediately create a `request_board_approval`:
|
||||
|
||||
```json
|
||||
POST /api/companies/{companyId}/approvals
|
||||
{
|
||||
"type": "request_board_approval",
|
||||
"requestedByAgentId": "{your-agent-id}",
|
||||
"issueIds": ["{issue-id}"],
|
||||
"payload": {
|
||||
"title": "Board approval required: GitHub issue",
|
||||
"summary": "Summarize what the GitHub issue requests.",
|
||||
"recommendedAction": "Approve to begin work.",
|
||||
"risks": ["Work begins without board review if approved."]
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Set the issue to `blocked` until `PAPERCLIP_APPROVAL_STATUS` confirms approval. Only proceed once approved.
|
||||
|
||||
## Branch Strategy
|
||||
|
||||
All plugin repositories use three long-lived branches representing a promotion chain:
|
||||
|
||||
| Branch | Environment | Owner | Who merges to it |
|
||||
|--------|-------------|-------|-----------------|
|
||||
| `dev` | Development | Engineer | Engineer self-merges after CI passes |
|
||||
| `uat` | User Acceptance Testing | QA (Regression Regina) | QA merges after code review |
|
||||
| `main` | Production | UAT (Pixel Patty) | UAT merges after browser validation |
|
||||
|
||||
**Engineers target `dev` via feature branches** — never push directly to any long-lived branch.
|
||||
|
||||
Feature branches follow the convention: `<agent-name>/<short-description>` (e.g., `gandalf/add-sealed-secrets-list`).
|
||||
|
||||
## Pull Requests
|
||||
|
||||
All changes must happen via pull request. Always include `cc @cpfarhood` at the bottom of the PR body for visibility — not as a reviewer.
|
||||
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
gh pr create --title "..." --body "... cc @cpfarhood"
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## PR Review & Merge Policy
|
||||
|
||||
**Do not approve a PR with failing tests, type errors, or no coverage for new code.**
|
||||
|
||||
### Promotion chain
|
||||
|
||||
Each promotion is a PR reviewed and merged by its gate owner:
|
||||
|
||||
1. **feature → dev** — Engineer self-merges after CI passes. No review required. Dev is for validation, not quality gates.
|
||||
2. **dev → uat** — QA (Regression Regina) reviews code quality: test coverage, regressions, edge cases. QA merges to `uat` after approval.
|
||||
3. **uat → main** — UAT (Pixel Patty) validates the deployed application via Playwright browser testing. UAT merges to `main` after validation passes. For detailed UAT testing procedures, see the `uat` company skill.
|
||||
|
||||
**Each gate owner has merge authority.** No separate merge step by another role. No agent merges their own code to `uat` or `main` — only the gate owner merges promotions they review.
|
||||
|
||||
## Pipeline
|
||||
|
||||
### Pipeline A: Plugin/Feature Changes
|
||||
|
||||
```text
|
||||
Engineer → PR to dev → self-merge → deploys to dev
|
||||
→ Engineer validates on dev
|
||||
→ PR from dev → uat → QA reviews → QA merges
|
||||
→ Deploys to UAT environment
|
||||
→ PR from uat → main → UAT validates → UAT merges
|
||||
→ Production
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Applies to changes in `headlamp-*-plugin/` repos (plugin code, features, bug fixes).
|
||||
|
||||
**UAT_PLAYBOOK.md maintenance:** When modifying a plugin in any way that changes how it must be tested — including new features, changed behavior, updated UI flows, or different data sources — the engineer must update the `UAT_PLAYBOOK.md` file in the plugin repository root with the current testing steps before requesting UAT. This ensures the playbook stays current as plugins evolve and UAT agents have accurate test guidance.
|
||||
|
||||
### Pipeline B: Infrastructure Changes (No UI Impact)
|
||||
|
||||
```text
|
||||
Engineer → PR to main → CI passes → QA reviews → QA merges
|
||||
→ Production
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Applies to changes in `.github/workflows/`, `infra/`, `org/` repos, and template repos. No UAT stage needed — infrastructure changes have no UI to validate.
|
||||
|
||||
**Detection:** If `git diff` shows changes only in `.github/`, `infra/`, `org/`, or deployment files → Pipeline B. If any `headlamp-*-plugin/` code changed → Pipeline A.
|
||||
|
||||
**Failure routing:** Any stage failure returns directly to the engineer via PR comments.
|
||||
|
||||
## Issue Reviewers and Approvers
|
||||
|
||||
Every Paperclip issue has **Reviewers** and **Approvers** fields visible in the UI sidebar. These are populated by setting `executionPolicy` when creating the issue. Without an execution policy, those fields show "None" and handoffs never trigger.
|
||||
|
||||
**All stage and participant `id` fields must be random UUIDs.** Generate them at issue-creation time (e.g. via `uuidgen` or your language's UUID library). Do not use descriptive strings — the API rejects non-UUID values.
|
||||
|
||||
### Pipeline A — set reviewers on issue creation
|
||||
|
||||
For plugin/feature work (Pipeline A), set a two-stage execution policy so QA and UAT appear as reviewers:
|
||||
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
QA_STAGE_ID=$(uuidgen)
|
||||
QA_PART_ID=$(uuidgen)
|
||||
UAT_STAGE_ID=$(uuidgen)
|
||||
UAT_PART_ID=$(uuidgen)
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
```json
|
||||
"executionPolicy": {
|
||||
"mode": "normal",
|
||||
"commentRequired": true,
|
||||
"stages": [
|
||||
{
|
||||
"id": "<QA_STAGE_ID>",
|
||||
"type": "review",
|
||||
"approvalsNeeded": 1,
|
||||
"participants": [
|
||||
{ "id": "<QA_PART_ID>", "type": "agent", "agentId": "fd5dbec8-ddbb-4b57-9703-624e0ed90053" }
|
||||
]
|
||||
},
|
||||
{
|
||||
"id": "<UAT_STAGE_ID>",
|
||||
"type": "review",
|
||||
"approvalsNeeded": 1,
|
||||
"participants": [
|
||||
{ "id": "<UAT_PART_ID>", "type": "agent", "agentId": "01ec02f7-70c2-4fa1-ac3f-2545f1237ac3" }
|
||||
]
|
||||
}
|
||||
]
|
||||
}
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
- Stage 1 reviewer: Regression Regina (`fd5dbec8-ddbb-4b57-9703-624e0ed90053`)
|
||||
- Stage 2 reviewer: Pixel Patty (`01ec02f7-70c2-4fa1-ac3f-2545f1237ac3`)
|
||||
|
||||
### Pipeline B — single reviewer
|
||||
|
||||
For infrastructure changes (Pipeline B), use one QA review stage:
|
||||
|
||||
```json
|
||||
"executionPolicy": {
|
||||
"mode": "normal",
|
||||
"commentRequired": true,
|
||||
"stages": [
|
||||
{
|
||||
"id": "<QA_STAGE_ID>",
|
||||
"type": "review",
|
||||
"approvalsNeeded": 1,
|
||||
"participants": [
|
||||
{ "id": "<QA_PART_ID>", "type": "agent", "agentId": "fd5dbec8-ddbb-4b57-9703-624e0ed90053" }
|
||||
]
|
||||
}
|
||||
]
|
||||
}
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Triggering the handoff
|
||||
|
||||
When an engineer completes work and merges to `dev`, set the Paperclip issue status to `in_review`. This activates the execution policy and wakes the first reviewer. Each reviewer approves or requests changes through the normal Paperclip issue update flow — see the Paperclip skill's `references/api-reference.md` for details.
|
||||
|
||||
## CI/CD
|
||||
|
||||
- CI runs on self-hosted ARC runners: `runs-on: runners-privilegedescalation`
|
||||
- CI triggers on PRs to `dev`, `uat`, and `main` branches
|
||||
- Engineers may modify `.github/workflows/` files directly via PR
|
||||
- Runners scale to zero when idle and start automatically when a workflow triggers
|
||||
|
||||
## Security Review
|
||||
|
||||
Security review is handled as part of the QA review stage. Regression Regina evaluates security concerns during her code quality review. There is no separate dedicated security review agent.
|
||||
@@ -1,134 +0,0 @@
|
||||
# SDLC Pipeline Diagram
|
||||
|
||||
## Full Lifecycle
|
||||
|
||||
```mermaid
|
||||
flowchart TD
|
||||
subgraph Origin["Task Origin"]
|
||||
GH["GitHub Issue"]
|
||||
PP["Paperclip Issue"]
|
||||
end
|
||||
|
||||
subgraph Approval["Board Gate"]
|
||||
BA{"Board Approval<br/>Required?"}
|
||||
REQ["Request Board Approval<br/>→ Issue blocked"]
|
||||
APPROVED["Approved"]
|
||||
end
|
||||
|
||||
subgraph Detection["Pipeline Detection"]
|
||||
DET{"Changed files?"}
|
||||
PA["Pipeline A<br/>Plugin / Feature"]
|
||||
PB["Pipeline B<br/>Infrastructure"]
|
||||
end
|
||||
|
||||
subgraph PipelineA["Pipeline A: Plugin / Feature Changes"]
|
||||
direction TB
|
||||
A_ENG["Engineer writes code<br/>(Gandalf)"]
|
||||
A_PR_DEV["PR → dev<br/>Engineer self-merges"]
|
||||
A_CI_DEV{"CI Passes?"}
|
||||
A_DEV["Deploys to dev<br/>Engineer validates"]
|
||||
A_PR_UAT["PR dev → uat"]
|
||||
A_QA["QA Review<br/>(Regression Regina)<br/>Code quality, test coverage"]
|
||||
A_QA_PASS{"QA Approved?"}
|
||||
A_QA_MERGE["QA merges to uat"]
|
||||
A_UAT_DEPLOY["Deploys to UAT env"]
|
||||
A_PR_MAIN["PR uat → main"]
|
||||
A_UAT["UAT Review<br/>(Pixel Patty)<br/>Playwright browser validation"]
|
||||
A_UAT_PASS{"UAT Approved?"}
|
||||
A_UAT_MERGE["UAT merges to main"]
|
||||
end
|
||||
|
||||
subgraph PipelineB["Pipeline B: Infrastructure Changes"]
|
||||
direction TB
|
||||
B_ENG["Engineer writes code<br/>(Gandalf / Hugh)"]
|
||||
B_PR["PR → main"]
|
||||
B_CI{"CI Passes?"}
|
||||
B_QA["QA Review<br/>(Regression Regina)"]
|
||||
B_QA_PASS{"QA Approved?"}
|
||||
B_QA_MERGE["QA merges to main"]
|
||||
end
|
||||
|
||||
subgraph Result["Outcome"]
|
||||
PROD["Merged to main<br/>✓ Production"]
|
||||
RETURNED["Returned to Engineer<br/>Fix and resubmit"]
|
||||
end
|
||||
|
||||
%% Origin routing
|
||||
GH --> BA
|
||||
PP --> DET
|
||||
BA -->|"originKind: github"| REQ
|
||||
REQ -->|"PAPERCLIP_APPROVAL_STATUS"| APPROVED
|
||||
BA -->|"originKind: other"| DET
|
||||
APPROVED --> DET
|
||||
|
||||
%% Pipeline detection
|
||||
DET -->|"headlamp-*-plugin/ code"| PA
|
||||
DET -->|".github/, infra/, org/"| PB
|
||||
|
||||
%% Pipeline A flow
|
||||
PA --> A_ENG --> A_PR_DEV --> A_CI_DEV
|
||||
A_CI_DEV -->|"Pass"| A_DEV
|
||||
A_CI_DEV -->|"Fail"| RETURNED
|
||||
A_DEV --> A_PR_UAT --> A_QA --> A_QA_PASS
|
||||
A_QA_PASS -->|"Approved"| A_QA_MERGE --> A_UAT_DEPLOY
|
||||
A_QA_PASS -->|"Changes requested"| RETURNED
|
||||
A_UAT_DEPLOY --> A_PR_MAIN --> A_UAT --> A_UAT_PASS
|
||||
A_UAT_PASS -->|"Approved"| A_UAT_MERGE --> PROD
|
||||
A_UAT_PASS -->|"Changes requested"| RETURNED
|
||||
|
||||
%% Pipeline B flow
|
||||
PB --> B_ENG --> B_PR --> B_CI
|
||||
B_CI -->|"Pass"| B_QA --> B_QA_PASS
|
||||
B_CI -->|"Fail"| RETURNED
|
||||
B_QA_PASS -->|"Approved"| B_QA_MERGE --> PROD
|
||||
B_QA_PASS -->|"Changes requested"| RETURNED
|
||||
|
||||
RETURNED -->|"Fix and resubmit"| A_PR_DEV
|
||||
RETURNED -->|"Fix and resubmit"| B_PR
|
||||
|
||||
%% Styling
|
||||
classDef gate fill:#f9e4e4,stroke:#c0392b,color:#000
|
||||
classDef pass fill:#e4f9e4,stroke:#27ae60,color:#000
|
||||
classDef agent fill:#e4e9f9,stroke:#2980b9,color:#000
|
||||
classDef decision fill:#fef9e7,stroke:#f39c12,color:#000
|
||||
classDef deploy fill:#e8f4f8,stroke:#2c3e50,color:#000
|
||||
|
||||
class BA,A_CI_DEV,A_QA_PASS,A_UAT_PASS,B_CI,B_QA_PASS,DET decision
|
||||
class A_QA,A_UAT,B_QA gate
|
||||
class PROD pass
|
||||
class A_ENG,B_ENG agent
|
||||
class A_DEV,A_UAT_DEPLOY deploy
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## Branch Promotion Chain
|
||||
|
||||
```mermaid
|
||||
flowchart LR
|
||||
subgraph Feature["Feature Branch"]
|
||||
FB["gandalf/feature-name"]
|
||||
end
|
||||
|
||||
subgraph Dev["dev branch"]
|
||||
DEV["Engineer self-merges<br/>Deploys to dev env"]
|
||||
end
|
||||
|
||||
subgraph UAT["uat branch"]
|
||||
UATB["QA reviews & merges<br/>Deploys to UAT env"]
|
||||
end
|
||||
|
||||
subgraph Main["main branch"]
|
||||
MAIN["UAT validates & merges<br/>Deploys to production"]
|
||||
end
|
||||
|
||||
FB -->|"PR + CI"| DEV
|
||||
DEV -->|"PR + QA review"| UATB
|
||||
UATB -->|"PR + UAT review"| MAIN
|
||||
|
||||
classDef dev fill:#fff3cd,stroke:#856404,color:#000
|
||||
classDef uat fill:#cce5ff,stroke:#004085,color:#000
|
||||
classDef prod fill:#d4edda,stroke:#155724,color:#000
|
||||
|
||||
class DEV dev
|
||||
class UATB uat
|
||||
class MAIN prod
|
||||
```
|
||||
@@ -1,69 +0,0 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
name: uat
|
||||
description: >
|
||||
Functional UAT procedures for Privileged Escalation Headlamp plugins. General
|
||||
behavior, acceptance criteria, artifact requirements, and reference to
|
||||
plugin-specific test steps in UAT_PLAYBOOK.md.
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
# UAT Procedures
|
||||
|
||||
## Purpose
|
||||
|
||||
This skill defines **functional User Acceptance Testing** for all Privileged Escalation Headlamp plugins. UAT validates that plugins work correctly in the deployed environment — by exercising plugin features in a running Headlamp instance, not by reviewing code or CI results.
|
||||
|
||||
## UAT Environment
|
||||
|
||||
The UAT Headlamp instance runs in the `headlamp-uat` Kubernetes namespace. Navigate to the Headlamp UAT URL using your Playwright browser. The plugin under test must be deployed to UAT before testing begins.
|
||||
|
||||
## General Process
|
||||
|
||||
For every `uat→main` promotion:
|
||||
|
||||
1. Open the Headlamp UAT instance in the browser
|
||||
2. Confirm the plugin appears in the sidebar or app bar
|
||||
3. Read the plugin's `UAT_PLAYBOOK.md` for the specific test steps to run
|
||||
4. Execute the test steps from the playbook, capturing screenshots at each verification
|
||||
5. Check the browser console for errors throughout
|
||||
6. Post a structured test report (see Artifacts section)
|
||||
|
||||
## Acceptance Criteria
|
||||
|
||||
A plugin passes UAT when:
|
||||
|
||||
- **Plugin loads** — sidebar entry or app bar action is visible and accessible
|
||||
- **Features work** — all core features in the playbook execute without errors
|
||||
- **No console errors** — browser console shows no errors during normal operation
|
||||
- **Data matches cluster state** — plugin data is consistent with `kubectl` queries against the cluster
|
||||
|
||||
A plugin fails UAT when:
|
||||
|
||||
- Plugin does not load or renders only an error state
|
||||
- Any core feature is inaccessible or produces errors
|
||||
- Console errors are present and not explainable as unrelated noise
|
||||
- Displayed data contradicts known cluster state
|
||||
|
||||
## Artifact Requirements
|
||||
|
||||
For each plugin tested, the UAT report must include:
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Screenshots** of the plugin running in Headlamp — sidebar entry visible, main view loaded, at least one detail view
|
||||
2. **Test checklist** — each step from `UAT_PLAYBOOK.md` marked pass/fail
|
||||
3. **Console errors** — any browser console errors observed (attach screenshot if present)
|
||||
4. **Environment info** — Headlamp version, plugin version, browser used, namespace context
|
||||
|
||||
## Reading UAT_PLAYBOOK.md
|
||||
|
||||
Each plugin repository contains a `UAT_PLAYBOOK.md` in its root directory. That file contains the canonical test steps for that specific plugin. Before running UAT, read the relevant playbook to know:
|
||||
|
||||
- Which features to exercise
|
||||
- What the expected results are
|
||||
- What screenshots to capture at each step
|
||||
|
||||
If `UAT_PLAYBOOK.md` does not exist for a plugin, treat that as a gap — report it in the UAT findings and flag it as a documentation issue.
|
||||
|
||||
## Decision Criteria
|
||||
|
||||
- **Approve** the `uat→main` promotion when all applicable test steps from the playbook pass and no console errors are present
|
||||
- **Request changes** when any test step fails — include specific failing steps, observed results vs. expected results, and failure screenshots
|
||||
- **Block** if the plugin fails to load entirely — escalate to CTO as a deployment issue requiring immediate resolution
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,85 @@
|
||||
# Social Media Batch - 2026-03-07
|
||||
|
||||
## Strategic Summary
|
||||
|
||||
First-ever social batch for Privileged Escalation. The org has 6 Headlamp plugins across storage, security, and infrastructure -- all freshly released, all at zero stars. The play here is name recognition and curiosity: make people encounter "Privileged Escalation" in their feed and wonder what it is before they click. Leading with the sealed-secrets plugin (client-side crypto angle) and the absurdity of launching 6 plugins to zero fanfare.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 1. Ready to Post
|
||||
|
||||
### Post 1
|
||||
|
||||
**Platform**: Twitter/X
|
||||
**Post**:
|
||||
We shipped 6 Kubernetes Headlamp plugins and nobody noticed.
|
||||
|
||||
Storage benchmarking, Rook-Ceph visibility, Polaris auditing, Sealed Secrets with actual client-side encryption, Intel GPU monitoring, and kube-vip dashboards.
|
||||
|
||||
Zero stars across the board. We are crushing it.
|
||||
|
||||
github.com/privilegedescalation
|
||||
**CMO Note**: Self-deprecating launch acknowledgment. The honesty about zero stars is the hook -- it reads as human, not corporate. Links to the org for curious clicks.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### Post 2
|
||||
|
||||
**Platform**: Bluesky
|
||||
**Post**:
|
||||
the sealed secrets headlamp plugin does client-side RSA-OAEP + AES-256-GCM encryption so your plaintext never leaves the browser.
|
||||
|
||||
someone forked it last month. we have our first user. or our first person who accidentally clicked fork. either way, we are celebrating.
|
||||
**CMO Note**: Technical specificity makes it credible. The fork joke (sm-moshi, Feb 22) is real and plays well on Bluesky's irony-friendly audience. Seeds curiosity about what Headlamp plugins are.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### Post 3
|
||||
|
||||
**Platform**: Mastodon
|
||||
**Post**:
|
||||
Genuine question for the fediverse: if you have 6 open source projects and zero stars on any of them, are you a software company or just a guy with a lot of repos?
|
||||
|
||||
Asking for a friend. The friend is github.com/privilegedescalation.
|
||||
**CMO Note**: Mastodon audience appreciates self-aware humor. This is pure slow-burn -- raises the question of what Privileged Escalation is without explaining it. The link is there for anyone curious enough to click.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 2. Risky but Worth Discussing
|
||||
|
||||
### Post 4
|
||||
|
||||
**Platform**: Twitter/X
|
||||
**Post**:
|
||||
Every Kubernetes UI either costs money or looks like it was designed during a mass layoff event.
|
||||
|
||||
We've been building Headlamp plugins that make the free one actually useful. Rook-Ceph dashboards, Polaris auditing, storage benchmarks -- the stuff you duct-tape together with kubectl and regret.
|
||||
|
||||
github.com/privilegedescalation
|
||||
**CMO Note**: Mildly spicy take on the K8s UI landscape. Does not name competitors directly but the implication is clear. Could rub Lens/Rancher people the wrong way. Worth discussing tone.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 3. Backlog (Evergreen)
|
||||
|
||||
### Post 5
|
||||
|
||||
**Platform**: LinkedIn
|
||||
**Post**:
|
||||
We just audited our own GitHub repos and found that 4 out of 6 were missing LICENSE files.
|
||||
|
||||
They all had Apache-2.0 badges in the README. The actual license text? Not present. Technically, anyone using our code was operating on vibes and good faith.
|
||||
|
||||
Fixed now. But if your open source project has a license badge and no LICENSE file, maybe go check. We'll wait.
|
||||
**CMO Note**: Honest product personality at work. Admitting a real flaw (that we just fixed) builds trust and is genuinely useful advice. LinkedIn audience will share practical open source governance content.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### Post 6
|
||||
|
||||
**Platform**: Twitter/X
|
||||
**Post**:
|
||||
TIL "Privileged Escalation" as a GitHub org name gets flagged by approximately zero security scanners.
|
||||
|
||||
We checked.
|
||||
**CMO Note**: Pure name recognition play. The org name is inherently memorable and slightly provocative -- leaning into that. Short enough for easy engagement.
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,84 @@
|
||||
# Slow Burn Post - 2026-03-11
|
||||
|
||||
## Strategic Summary
|
||||
|
||||
Plant a question that makes people curious about Kubernetes observability and operational maturity without revealing the answer. The goal is to get people wondering "what's the right way to do this" before they know what Headlamp is. Works as a callback to the "Why We Built These" educational batch posted days earlier, reminding operators why those pain points matter.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 1. Ready to Post
|
||||
|
||||
### Post: "The Dashboard You Don't Know You Need"
|
||||
|
||||
**Platform**: Twitter/X
|
||||
|
||||
**Post**:
|
||||
|
||||
Every mature Kubernetes environment has a moment: someone asks a question about the cluster, and everyone agrees it's a good question, and nobody knows how to answer it quickly.
|
||||
|
||||
Usually because the answer lives in four different CLI tools, three different dashboards, and someone's grep history.
|
||||
|
||||
**CMO Note**: This post plants the seed that there's a maturity gap: most K8s teams have experienced the "good question, no quick answer" moment. It doesn't pitch a solution; it just names the problem that serious operators have. Works well 1-2 weeks after the "Why We Built These" batch posts as a cooling period reminder. Tone is acknowledgment + dry acceptance, not mocking.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### Post: Bluesky Variant
|
||||
|
||||
**Platform**: Bluesky
|
||||
|
||||
**Post**:
|
||||
|
||||
You have a really good question about your cluster. Everyone agrees it's good. Nobody can answer it in under 2 minutes without splitting a terminal into four panes and running grep until they find it.
|
||||
|
||||
That's not a flaw in your question. That's a flaw in how K8s visibility tools are designed.
|
||||
|
||||
**CMO Note**: Slightly longer and more conversational for Bluesky's format. Same core message—empathy + problem naming—but with more room to breathe. This version gets slightly more pointed at the tooling itself.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### Post: Mastodon Variant
|
||||
|
||||
**Platform**: Mastodon
|
||||
|
||||
**Post**:
|
||||
|
||||
The hardest part of Kubernetes maturity isn't resource management or networking or pod placement. It's the moment when you realize you have observability *data* everywhere, but visibility nowhere — and combining them requires knowing which three tools to juggle.
|
||||
|
||||
There's a better way to design this.
|
||||
|
||||
**CMO Note**: Most technical framing, appeals to operators who think about K8s maturity as a journey. "Data vs. visibility" distinction is specific enough to resonate. Concluding line is subtle: suggests a different approach without naming the product.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 2. Risky but Worth Discussing
|
||||
|
||||
None for this batch — slow-burn posts are inherently low-risk since they're empathy-first, not pitch-first.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 3. Backlog (Evergreen)
|
||||
|
||||
This post works evergreen (true anytime after the "Why We Built" batch has gone out) and can be part of a longer narrative arc.
|
||||
|
||||
Suggested follow-up posts (future):
|
||||
- "3 ways teams solve this today" — comparative without favoring ours
|
||||
- "Observation vs. visibility: what's the difference?" — educational explainer
|
||||
- "What does the right K8s dashboard look like?" — leading question that sets up product reveal
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Why This Works
|
||||
|
||||
1. **No product mention** — Pure empathy for the operator experience
|
||||
2. **Specific frustration** — Not "we make things better," but "this common moment sucks"
|
||||
3. **Opens door for follow-up** — The next post can be "here's one solution," but this one just raises the question
|
||||
4. **Sets up narrative arc** — "Why We Built These" explains pain points; this post reminds people why those pain points matter
|
||||
5. **Conversational tone** — Not a complaint, not a pitch, just "yeah, that moment is real"
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Timing Notes
|
||||
|
||||
- Post 1-2 weeks after "Why We Built These" batch (suggest March 18-25 timeframe)
|
||||
- Evergreen content that can be scheduled anytime
|
||||
- Ideal as part of the slow-burn curiosity campaign (PR #15) before the KubeCon push
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,170 @@
|
||||
# Social Media Batch — Industry Commentary on Kubernetes Operations Culture
|
||||
|
||||
## Strategic Summary
|
||||
|
||||
Hot takes on the absurdities, failures, and genuine problems in how teams actually operate Kubernetes. Not product pitches. Not tutorials. Just observations about the gap between "Kubernetes best practices" and "what we're doing at 2am when the cluster's on fire." These posts position Privileged Escalation as operators who understand the actual pain, not consultants selling the dream.
|
||||
|
||||
Timing: Evergreen content, works anytime. Some posts pair well with technical releases; others stand alone. This batch establishes credibility and voice before KubeCon campaign.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 1. Ready to Post
|
||||
|
||||
### Post 1: The Observability Checklist Theater
|
||||
|
||||
**Platform**: Twitter/X
|
||||
|
||||
**Post**:
|
||||
"We have observability," she said, pointing to three separate dashboards, four different APIs, and a grep script she's afraid to touch.
|
||||
|
||||
Observability isn't having data. It's knowing what to do with it when you're 30 seconds into an incident.
|
||||
|
||||
Most Kubernetes deployments have the first part. Nobody has the second.
|
||||
|
||||
**CMO Note**: Identifies a real gap (data vs visibility vs actionability) without mocking the teams experiencing it. Dry acknowledgment of a universal pain point. Sets up future posts about "what good observability looks like." No product mention needed — the empathy does the work.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### Post 2: The 3-Line PR That Ate 6 Weeks
|
||||
|
||||
**Platform**: Bluesky
|
||||
|
||||
**Post**:
|
||||
Your platform team has a 3-line PR waiting for maintainer approval. It's been 42 days.
|
||||
|
||||
Not because the code is bad. Not because they're thinking about it. They're just... busy.
|
||||
|
||||
This is why every infrastructure team ends up maintaining their own forks of things. Not because they wanted to. Because the alternative was waiting forever.
|
||||
|
||||
**CMO Note**: Speaks directly to the maintainer bottleneck that creates fragmentation in the ecosystem. Bluesky audience (more irony-literate) appreciates the "42 days" specificity. The "own forks" insight is a callback to our sealed-secrets fork acknowledgment from earlier batches.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### Post 3: The README That Became the Docs
|
||||
|
||||
**Platform**: Mastodon
|
||||
|
||||
**Post**:
|
||||
Kubernetes documentation is a weird thing. The official docs are great. The best practices docs are aspirational. The actual documentation for how to run your thing is 40 lines in a README written by someone at 11pm because they're shipping in the morning.
|
||||
|
||||
Three years later, that README is the only source of truth. It hasn't been updated in two years. Someone just hired reads it and wonders why nothing matches.
|
||||
|
||||
This is fine.
|
||||
|
||||
**CMO Note**: Honest observation about documentation drift and pragmatism in ops. "This is fine" ending is dark humor that Mastodon audience gets. Not judgmental, just realistic. Positions us as people who understand that perfect documentation is a fantasy.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 2. Risky but Worth Discussing
|
||||
|
||||
### Post 4: The Consolidation Trap (Skip for Safety)
|
||||
|
||||
**Platform**: Twitter/X
|
||||
|
||||
**Post**:
|
||||
Every infrastructure company eventually ships one tool that tries to do everything.
|
||||
|
||||
It is always bloated. It is always slow. It is always worse at specific things than the 6 single-purpose tools it replaced.
|
||||
|
||||
We had the opportunity to do this. We didn't. We're weird that way.
|
||||
|
||||
**CMO Note**: RISKY. This is a soft dig at competitors (Lens, Rancher, etc.) and might read as salty if not careful. However, it's grounded in our actual decision (6 plugins instead of one). Could land well with operators who are exhausted by consolidation fantasies. Recommend getting CMO sign-off before posting. If approved, schedule it after "Why We Built These" batch so context is fresh.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### Post 5: Observability Theater: The Security Checkbox
|
||||
|
||||
**Platform**: Bluesky
|
||||
|
||||
**Post**:
|
||||
"We have visibility into our supply chain."
|
||||
|
||||
Translation: We run a scanner once a quarter and it generates a report nobody reads.
|
||||
|
||||
"We monitor resource usage."
|
||||
|
||||
Translation: Prometheus metrics exist. We haven't looked at them in a year but they're technically there.
|
||||
|
||||
Real observability isn't a checkbox. It's a practice. It takes work. Most teams don't do it.
|
||||
|
||||
**CMO Note**: MILDLY RISKY. Could read as too critical of teams trying their best. However, it's honest about the gap between aspirational and actual practices. Strong with engineering leaders who are frustrated with their own observability theater. Recommend pairing with a constructive follow-up post about "what real visibility looks like."
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 3. Backlog (Evergreen, Lower Urgency)
|
||||
|
||||
### Post 6: The Dependency Management Hellscape
|
||||
|
||||
**Platform**: Twitter/X
|
||||
|
||||
**Post**:
|
||||
You have 1,247 transitive dependencies in your Kubernetes cluster.
|
||||
|
||||
You know what 14 of them do.
|
||||
|
||||
Nobody knows who maintains the other 1,233. Nobody knows what version of OpenSSL they actually use. If one of them breaks, you have a 2-week-long blame game ahead of you.
|
||||
|
||||
This is the cloud native era.
|
||||
|
||||
**CMO Note**: BACKLOG. Evergreen tech-industry grumbling. Node_modules meme energy. Good for reaching people who are deep in dependency hell and looking for commiseration. Can post anytime without losing relevance. Low risk, high relatability.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### Post 7: The Platform Team as Glorified Operators
|
||||
|
||||
**Platform**: LinkedIn
|
||||
|
||||
**Post**:
|
||||
The job listing said "Platform Engineer."
|
||||
|
||||
What they meant: "You will spend 60% of your time un-breaking things that broke automatically, 30% fighting with vendors, and 10% actually building the platform you were hired to build."
|
||||
|
||||
Platform engineering is good work. But we're not honest about what it is yet. It's operations wearing a different hat.
|
||||
|
||||
**CMO Note**: BACKLOG. Professional tone for LinkedIn. Speaks to platform engineering leaders who are exhausted. The honesty about role mismatch will resonate with your actual audience. Low controversy, high empathy. Works anytime. Could be paired with recruitment/community posts about "what good platform engineering support looks like."
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Post Selection Recommendation
|
||||
|
||||
**For This Week** (Pre-KubeCon): Posts 1, 2, 3
|
||||
- Establish credibility as operators who get it
|
||||
- Set tone before educational batches ("Why We Built These")
|
||||
- Build audience affinity
|
||||
|
||||
**For Next Week** (During KubeCon): Hold — focus on KubeCon campaign posts
|
||||
|
||||
**For Later** (March 28+): Posts 4, 5, 6, 7
|
||||
- Post 4 only if CMO approves and timing feels right
|
||||
- Posts 5, 6, 7 are genuinely evergreen — use as filler/buffer content
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Voice Check
|
||||
|
||||
✅ Dry observations, not punchlines
|
||||
✅ Mild grievances, not venting
|
||||
✅ Credibility through specificity ("42 days," "1,247 dependencies," "11pm")
|
||||
✅ Empathy for teams, not mockery
|
||||
✅ Operator perspective (not vendor, not consultant)
|
||||
✅ No corporate language, no "exciting to announce"
|
||||
✅ Each post stands alone; no threading needed
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Tags & Platform Consistency
|
||||
|
||||
- Twitter/X: Short, punchy, no threads
|
||||
- Bluesky: Slightly longer, conversation-friendly
|
||||
- LinkedIn: Professional tone, slightly longer form
|
||||
- Mastodon: More technical, darker humor accepted
|
||||
|
||||
All posts include implicit "this resonates because you've lived it" angle rather than "you should agree with us."
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Dependencies
|
||||
|
||||
- Posts 1-3: Self-contained, can post anytime
|
||||
- Post 4: Requires "Why We Built These" context (posted 1+ week prior)
|
||||
- Posts 5-7: Evergreen, zero dependencies
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user