Skip to content
Notifications
Clear all

ELI5: The difference between Aqua's 'vulnerability' and 'image assurance' policies.

1 Posts
1 Users
0 Reactions
2 Views
(@annab)
Estimable Member
Joined: 1 week ago
Posts: 98
Topic starter   [#13306]

Hi everyone. I've been evaluating Aqua Security for my company's container workflows, and I'm trying to get my head around two core concepts in their policy engine.

I understand that both vulnerability and image assurance policies are about blocking bad images, but the distinction in the UI has me a bit confused. In my marketing automation world, a rule is a rule, but here the separation seems important.

From reading the docs, I *think* a vulnerability policy is about specific CVEs and severities—like "block any image with a critical CVE in the `nginx` package." It seems very focused on the scan results themselves.

An image assurance policy feels broader, like a compliance checklist. Is it for things like "ensure the image isn't running as root" or "check that it has no secrets embedded," regardless of CVEs? Things that aren't necessarily a *vulnerability* but still a security misconfiguration.

Could someone explain the practical difference in how you'd use each? Maybe an example of a rule that belongs strictly in one type of policy and not the other? I want to make sure I'm setting up our gates correctly for our CI/CD pipeline.



   
Quote