Pod security policies deprecated and mentioned in the documentation please update information.

[abengtss-max]

[Enter feedback here]

Lets remove the mentioning of PSP for our Azure Policies. PSP is deprecated since release 1.21, please use an alternative solution then PSP. please refer to the Azure Policy:

Kubernetes cluster containers should not use forbidden sysctl interfaces

Kubernetes cluster containers should only use allowed AppArmor profiles

Kubernetes cluster containers should only use allowed ProcMountType

Kubernetes cluster containers should only use allowed seccomp profiles

Kubernetes cluster pod FlexVolume volumes should only use allowed drivers

Kubernetes cluster pod hostPath volumes should only use allowed host paths

Kubernetes cluster pods and containers should only run with approved user and group IDs

Kubernetes cluster pods and containers should only use allowed SELinux options

Kubernetes cluster pods and containers should only use allowed SELinux options

---

Document Details

⚠ Do not edit this section. It is required for learn.microsoft.com ➟ GitHub issue linking.

• ID: 33640fb2-b9e7-bd40-f970-acaf0b5a9fd1
• Version Independent ID: cc8276c0-fc47-3bfa-6c43-bde346fb4a86
• Content: Built-in policy definitions for Azure Kubernetes Service - Azure Kubernetes Service
• Content Source: articles/aks/policy-reference.md
• Service: container-service
• GitHub Login: @MGoedtel
• Microsoft Alias: magoedte

[YashikaTyagii]

@abengtss-max Thanks for your feedback! We will investigate and update as appropriate.

[AjayBathini-MSFT]

@abengtss-max Thanks for bringing this to our attention. I'm going to assign this to the document author so they can take a look at it accordingly.

[AjayBathini-MSFT]

@MGoedtel Can you please check and add your comments on this doc update request as applicable.

[MGoedtel]

We sincerely apologize for not reviewing your issue in a timely manner and for the delayed response. The requested updates have not been made since the creation of this issue, and the timeline for resolution may vary based on resourcing, so we've created an internal work item address your feedback. We are closing this issue for now, but feel free to comment here as necessary. #please-close