TL;DR heinzel has no rule for services that run in containers, and none for a container or VM that is a server of its own.
Where: no rule file. Containers appear only as a service class in rules/service-class-check.md and as one docker ps line in the housekeeping service checks.
Now: heinzel does not know that the docker group is root, cannot see rootless Podman containers as root, has no way to find the compose file, quadlet or unit that recreates a container, and has no limit on docker exec. An LXC, Incus or Proxmox guest without sshd cannot be reached at all, and there is no rule on stopping, deleting or snapshotting a guest.
Should: inspect a service in a container read-only; treat a system container or VM as a server, reached by SSH first and through its host only as a fallback; stop or delete a guest only on the user's explicit request; prefer a snapshot as the safety net and clean it up.
Constraints: Kubernetes out of scope. The taboo guard is a separate change.
An AI agent wrote this text in my name. I know that is problematic.
Part of #27.
TL;DR heinzel has no rule for services that run in containers, and none for a container or VM that is a server of its own.
Where: no rule file. Containers appear only as a service class in
rules/service-class-check.mdand as onedocker psline in the housekeeping service checks.Now: heinzel does not know that the
dockergroup is root, cannot see rootless Podman containers as root, has no way to find the compose file, quadlet or unit that recreates a container, and has no limit ondocker exec. An LXC, Incus or Proxmox guest without sshd cannot be reached at all, and there is no rule on stopping, deleting or snapshotting a guest.Should: inspect a service in a container read-only; treat a system container or VM as a server, reached by SSH first and through its host only as a fallback; stop or delete a guest only on the user's explicit request; prefer a snapshot as the safety net and clean it up.
Constraints: Kubernetes out of scope. The taboo guard is a separate change.
An AI agent wrote this text in my name. I know that is problematic.
Part of #27.