Replies: 1 comment 1 reply
-
Hi Gustavo, thanks for the questions. I will attempt to shed some light.
The alpine matcher's name is indeed
You are right in your assumption, no matchers have the ability to ignore any vulns currently, the documented example is hypothetical example of how passing config values for matchers are passed to the respective factory constructor . Having said that, you (more than us) are the target audience for this documentation. What do you think would be a decent docs change to ensure the issues you found aren't encountered over and over. PS. We love to here about community uses of Clair and what problems you're trying to solve. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Hey Folks,
I finished the distributed deployment of Clair 4.3.5 inside a K8s cluster and everything seems to be working fine. However, I'm seeing some weird behaviors when putting specific matchers configurations. I'll try to explain below with different configurations.
1. A working configuration
Using the following configuration:
We get the following
clairctl
output, which I think it is correct:2. A NOT working configuration, after adding specific
matchers
namesUsing the following configuration:
We get the following
clairctl
output, which I think it is NOT correct:3. A working configuration, after adding
-matcher
at the end of the matcher nameUsing the following configuration, which differs from the previous one only by the
-matcher
at the end of the matcher name:We get the following
clairctl
output, which I think it is correct:Why is it working now? The Clair v4 documentation does not state anything about the
-matcher
at the end of the matcher's names.4. A NOT working configuration, after adding
ignore_vulns
in the matcher configuration blockUsing the following configuration, which differs from the previous one only by the added
config
block insidematchers
:We get the following
clairctl
output, which I think it is NOT correct since it is still reportingCVE-2021-42373
:I've been reading clair and claircore source code and it seems that
ignore_vulns
is not implemented. Could that be possible or I'm doing wrong reading the code?Could someone help me understand why this behavior, please?
Thanks in advance,
Gustavo
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions