Cases35 cases

31 to 35 of 35

1. IL-0061 A Terraform pull request merged out of order deleted a production GKE cluster, and recreating it deleted a second one

   Spotify2019

   Symptoms

   Terraform, applied from the shared cluster configuration repository after a merge, deleted Spotify's production GKE cluster in Asia. While the team tried to recreate it, Terraform deleted a second production cluster, so two of the three production clusters were gone.

   Resources deleted

   Trigger

   A feature team's pull request that added three users to an existing RBAC role binding file was merged before the cluster operators' pull request that imported the Asia cluster into Terraform state. The review build of the import pull request had already written the cluster into the shared state file, and the merged configuration had no definition of the Asia cluster, so Terraform removed it.

   Root cause

   Configuration change

   Component

   TerraformCI systemGKE control plane

   Contributing factor

   No safeguard on destructive changeMissed in reviewUnverified assumption

   Detection

   Internal service discovery could not reach the deleted cluster and the cluster operator team was paged.

   Remediation

   • removed the deleted clusters from the service discovery configuration and restarted service discovery so clients fell back to the instances outside Kubernetes
   • one team that ran half on Kubernetes and half on VMs created more VMs outside Kubernetes to handle the load
   • recreated the clusters, using the hourly backups
   • updated the places where the old clusters' master IPs were hardcoded

   Action items

   • Post the Terraform dry-run output as a comment on each pull request
   • Require a status check that the branch is up to date with master, so the dry run reflects what will actually happen
   • Require an approving review on pull requests
   • Fail reviews automatically when certain keywords such as destroy appear; cluster deletions are done manually outside this repository
   • Add linters and validators for the cluster configuration
   • Schedule and announce disaster recovery tests that cover a cluster going away and smaller failures

   Lessons

   Plan for failure from the start and migrate large infrastructure gradually, so there is redundancy and a way back. A backup whose restore has never been tested is not a backup. Practising disaster recovery paid off: restoring the first deleted cluster took three and a quarter hours, and the team can now restore a larger cluster in one hour. What matters is not who made the mistake but what was learned from it.

   View case
2. IL-0066 Broken ConfigMap change lay dormant for weeks, then took down Pusher's edge proxy when a cluster upgrade replaced its pods

   Pusher2019

   Symptoms

   During a cluster upgrade, all traffic to Pusher's products stopped. The speaker recalls that requests were failing with 500 errors.

   Service outageHigh error rate

   Trigger

   A cluster upgrade replaced nodes, so the bridge pods restarted and loaded a ConfigMap that had been changed three or four weeks earlier.

   Root cause

   Configuration change

   Component

   ConfigMaps and Secrets

   Contributing factor

   Change with a delayed effectUnverified assumption

   Action items

   • Build and run Wave so that changes to ConfigMaps and Secrets roll out new pods immediately

   Lessons

   A ConfigMap change does not restart the pods that use it, so for an application that cannot reload its configuration the change takes effect only when pods are next replaced, possibly weeks later during unrelated work. Tie configuration to the pod template so a bad change fails at the moment it is made.

   View case
3. IL-0052 A cryptocurrency miner ran on every node of the development and staging clusters through a public, unauthenticated Weave Scope dashboard

   JW Player2019

   Symptoms

   Datadog alerted the DevOps team to a high normalised load average, first on the staging cluster (Day 0, 21:06 EST) and the next day on the development cluster (Day 1, 16:53 EST). The load was first put down to a legitimate service that kept scaling up and down in both environments, and because of the volume of identical alerts they were muted until things settled.

   Sustained high node CPUUnauthorised access or a foreign workload

   Trigger

   An automated crawler found the Weave Scope dashboard on a public load balancer that required no authentication. Weave Scope can open a shell in running containers, and its scope-agent containers ran privileged, as root and with the host's root filesystem mounted, so a command started there could run on the host.

   Root cause

   Configuration change

   Component

   Cluster dashboardCloud load balancer

   Contributing factor

   Ignored early signalUnreviewed defaultsExcessive blast radiusMonitoring blind spot

   Detection

   Datadog alerts on high normalised load average, muted at first as noise from a legitimate service; on Day 3 an engineer ran top on a node and found the gcc process at 100% CPU.

   Remediation

   • stopped Weave Scope and removed its deployment from all Kubernetes clusters
   • checked access logs for unauthorised access to the instances
   • confirmed the miner's outbound connections went only to a mining pool
   • isolated one affected node for later investigation
   • rotated out every node in each cluster so all affected hosts were destroyed and rebuilt

   Action items

   • Audit all Kubernetes and deployment YAML files and security groups for services that are unintentionally public or misconfigured
   • Replace load-average alerts with more meaningful monitors and tune them to signal a real anomaly
   • Research tools such as falcon or sysdig for behavioural monitoring and anomaly and intrusion detection
   • Evaluate Istio and Linkerd for observing and controlling end-to-end network traffic
   • Analyse the cost of scanning Docker images and containers for known vulnerabilities
   • Set aside time in architecture discussions to revisit older choices such as running containers as root
   • Share knowledge of large projects, such as Kubernetes version migrations, across the whole team

   Lessons

   Load average was not a useful signal for spotting a problem in the clusters, and muted noisy alerts nearly hid the miner. A load balancer that Kubernetes creates belongs to Kubernetes: a manual security group edit in the AWS console is reverted, so internal exposure must be declared in the Kubernetes YAML. A dashboard that can open shells, in front of privileged agents that mount the host's root filesystem, gives whoever reaches it root on every node.

   View case
4. IL-0035 Worker nodes went NotReady after a new ElastAlert rule without memory limits used up node memory

   NU.nl2019

   Symptoms

   The NU.nl development team got reports that several services on one of its Kubernetes clusters behaved erratically: occasional error pages, slow responses and timeouts. The affected services were mostly internal tools and dashboards.

   Node NotReadyHigh error rateHigh latencyIntermittent timeoutsMonitoring outageOOMKilled

   Trigger

   A new ElastAlert rule, deployed shortly before from the command line, that fired if the Cloudfront-* Elasticsearch indexes stopped receiving documents; those indexes take a few million requests per hour, and the rule made ElastAlert's memory grow without bound.

   Root cause

   Configuration change

   Component

   Container memory limitkubeletPrometheus

   Contributing factor

   No resource requests or limitsUnreviewed defaultsNo alert on limitMonitoring blind spotExcessive blast radius

   Detection

   Users reported error pages, slow responses and timeouts from several services; no alert fired.

   Remediation

   • terminated the NotReady nodes one by one so the auto-scaling group replaced them (the new nodes also went NotReady, but Prometheus and Grafana landed on a stable node)
   • found the ElastAlert pods' memory growth on the Grafana pod memory dashboard
   • fixed the ElastAlert problem that caused the memory growth

   Action items

   • Define alerts on resource usage such as CPU, memory and disk space
   • Keep researching an alerting strategy that combines Elasticsearch, Prometheus Alertmanager and New Relic
   • Consider exporting metrics out of the cluster and running Grafana outside it, on EC2 or a separate Kubernetes cluster
   • Either visualise the important metrics in the ELK stack or make Prometheus and Grafana more available, and improve the metrics strategy
   • Set resource limits for ElastAlert through the Helm values
   • Configure namespaces with default memory requests and limits
   • Isolate customer-facing workloads from build, logging and monitoring workloads (a dedicated node group, or later a separate tools cluster)
   • Deploy everything through automation such as Jenkins pipelines, and consider a GitOps approach
   • Deploy through a pipeline that includes a smoke test step
   • Make Kubernetes and cloud infrastructure work part of the team's sprints, picked up by all team members while pairing with more experienced members, and hold workshops that go deep into specific topics

   Lessons

   Fixing the root cause covers only a small part of what an incident can teach; the chain of smaller failures around it is where most of the learning is. A pod without a memory limit can take whole nodes down, so limits need defaults at the namespace level. Monitoring that runs inside the cluster it watches goes blind with it. Changes installed by hand from the command line leave the rest of the team without a record of what changed.

   View case
5. IL-0055 A failing CronJob with the default concurrency policy piled up thousands of restarting pods and took down a cluster

   Target2018

   Symptoms

   A Kubernetes cluster went down after one CronJob kept failing and its pods piled up. Because each failed run kept restarting instead of being replaced by the next one, the pods accumulated into the thousands. The speaker's arithmetic for a job scheduled every minute that fails for three days is 4,320 restarting pods.

   Service outage

   Trigger

   A CronJob kept failing.

   Root cause

   Configuration change

   Component

   Jobs and CronJobsNode pool

   Contributing factor

   Unreviewed defaultsAutomation amplification

   Lessons

   When deploying a CronJob, set its concurrency policy to Replace or Forbid; with the default, failing runs accumulate and restart together. An application should handle a missing dependency with probes and bounded back-off rather than crash in a loop, which also keeps it from hammering a dependency that is already struggling.

   View case

By root cause1