An enterprise cloud security architect is evaluating isolation boundaries for a multi-tenant microservices platform. The platform currently runs multiple containerized services sharing a single host Linux kernel. During a risk assessment, the team identifies a risk where a kernel-level privilege escalation or vulnerability exploitation within one container could allow an attacker to escape to the host host OS and compromise adjacent tenant workloads. Which of the following deployment strategies provides the strongest architectural isolation boundary to mitigate host kernel sharing risks?
- Encapsulating container execution environments inside dedicated lightweight virtual machines (microVMs) with independent kernelsCevap
- BConfiguring Linux kernel namespaces to enforce dedicated CPU hardware execution boundaries between container instances
- CPlacing all container instances into private internal virtual switch VLANs to isolate system call communication channels
- DImplementing stateful host firewalls on the parent operating system to filter unauthorized CPU syscall instructions
Cevap
Encapsulating container execution environments inside dedicated lightweight virtual machines (microVMs) with independent kernels provides the strongest architectural isolation boundary against host kernel exploits.
Encapsulating container workloads inside dedicated lightweight virtual machines (microVMs) provides each instance with a distinct guest kernel managed by hardware-assisted virtualization. This ensures that any exploit targeting kernel vulnerabilities remains isolated within the microVM guest rather than compromising the host OS kernel shared by other tenants.
Adım Adım Çözüm
Anahtar Kavram
Hypervisor-assisted container isolation (microVMs) vs. kernel-sharing container isolation
Tahmini Süre:2m 0s