feat(lab12): complete kata vs runc comparison with escape PoC - #1638
Open
Wilikson173 wants to merge 28 commits into
Open
feat(lab12): complete kata vs runc comparison with escape PoC#1638Wilikson173 wants to merge 28 commits into
Wilikson173 wants to merge 28 commits into
Conversation
feat(lab1): juice shop deploy + triage report + PR template + CI smoke test
feat(lab2): STRIDE threat model + secure variant diff via Threagile
Feature/lab3
feat(lab4): SBOM generation, SCA analysis, Trivy comparison, and Cosign-ready attestation
ZAP baseline,auth, Semgrep and SAST/DAST correlation
feat(lab6): Checkov, KICS scans and custom policy
feat(lab7): trivy + PSS restricted + conftest gate
feat(lab8): cosign sign + SBOM/provenance attestations + blob signing
…cryptominer detection
feat(lab9): falco custom rules + conftest hardening policies + bonus …
feat(lab10): defectdojo governance report + capstone walkthrough
feat(lab11): hardened nginx + WAF sidecar with OWASP CRS
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Goal
This PR delivers a complete comparison of Kata Containers vs runc: installation, side‑by‑side isolation tests (kernel, /dev, capabilities), performance benchmarks (startup time, I/O throughput), and a real container‑escape PoC demonstrating that Kata blocks what runc allows.
Changes
submissions/lab12.md— full report with analysis and conclusionslabs/lab12/results/runc-kernel.txt— kernel info inside runc containerlabs/lab12/results/kata-kernel.txt— kernel info inside Kata container (different kernel, proving VM isolation)labs/lab12/results/runc-devs.txt—/devlisting in runclabs/lab12/results/kata-devs.txt—/devlisting in Kata (fewer devices, more restricted)labs/lab12/results/dev-diff.txt— diff between the two (/dev/coreabsent in Kata)labs/lab12/results/runc-caps.txt— Linux capabilities in runclabs/lab12/results/kata-caps.txt— Linux capabilities in Kata (identical, but VM boundary provides extra isolation)labs/lab12/results/startup-bench.txt— 5‑run cold‑start benchmark for both runtimeslabs/lab12/results/io-bench.txt— I/O throughput benchmark (100MB dd to /dev/null)labs/lab12/results/kata-escape-attempt.txt— output when trying to escape from Kata (fails, host file untouched)Testing
All tests were run on a KVM‑capable Kali Linux host (kernel 6.12.33) with Kata Containers 3.32.0 and containerd 1.7.24.
1. Kernel comparison (Task 1)