Feature/alpine base #423
Open
Feature/alpine base #423
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
I've added an alpine base for the neo4j image. Renders at 443MB w. an image efficiency score of 99%, this image shreds ~200Mb from the image while being minimal in size. Alpine as a base gives you an os kernel layer of only 7 MB. The base image substitutes a lot of binaries with Busybox giving it a small surface for exploitation, and is not dependent on Debian releases to mitigate security flaws. I will test the image with some security scanning tools later, but some tests fail.
I would like to get some insight into these tests, as they may be flaky or misconfigured.
Enterprise image on the left and alpine-enterprise on the right. Tests bottom right.
