| name | eks-security |
| description | Use whenever someone needs security or compliance guidance for Amazon EKS — phrased as "CIS Benchmark for EKS", "HIPAA / PCI-DSS / FedRAMP / SOC 2 / GDPR on EKS", "harden my EKS cluster", "Bottlerocket vs AL2023 vs RHEL/Ubuntu AMI", "EKS Pod Identity vs IRSA", "Access Entries vs aws-auth", "GuardDuty for EKS", "Pod Security Admission / Kyverno / OPA", "NetworkPolicy / Security Groups for Pods", "ECR scanning / image signing (Cosign / Notation)", "EKS audit logging", "etcd / secrets encryption", or regulated-workload / audit-prep guidance. Walks the discovery-driven 7-layer security stack (OS/AMI → identity → workload → image → runtime → audit → compliance accelerators), the compliance-regime scope view, the AWS-canonical baseline, and a 30/60/90 hardening roadmap. Trigger even if "compliance" is never said — any EKS hardening, audit-prep, or regulated-workload decision qualifies. Skip for non-EKS (ECS/ROSA), account-level security with no EKS angle, or GenAI-workload security (use eks-genai). |
EKS Security & Compliance
End-to-end, opinionated security and compliance guidance for Amazon EKS, structured as a 7-layer stack plus a compliance-regime cross-cutting view. This skill is discovery-driven — the right hardening stack is a function of (compliance regime × OS-standardization mandate × team skill × audit timeline × workload sensitivity × air-gap requirement × scale × operational-overhead tolerance). Skipping the discovery questions makes the recommendation wrong about half the time.
Two AWS-published guides are the canonical foundation and every recommendation must align with one or both: the EKS Best Practices: Compliance guide and the EKS Best Practices: Runtime Security guide. For "how do I run a single cluster well" (non-security) use eks-best-practices; for designing/building the cluster use eks-design / eks-build.
The accuracy bar (non-negotiable for this skill). Compliance is the one domain where customers validate every claim against an auditor. Compliance status changes over time — always defer to the live AWS Services in Scope page before quoting program coverage in any customer-facing document. Never state a cryptographic-module status, FedRAMP boundary, or certification you cannot cite to an AWS-published source. When you can't ground a claim, say so — do not synthesize.
When to Use This Skill
Activate when the user wants to:
- Harden an EKS cluster or prepare for a first-time compliance audit (HIPAA, PCI-DSS, FedRAMP, SOC 2, ISO 27001, GDPR, HITRUST, NIST 800-53/171)
- Choose an OS / AMI strategy for security (Bottlerocket vs AL2023-with-CIS vs Ubuntu Pro vs RHEL vs Auto Mode)
- Decide identity & access (EKS Pod Identity vs IRSA; Access Entries vs
aws-auth)
- Apply workload security (Pod Security Admission, Kyverno/OPA, NetworkPolicy, Security Groups for Pods)
- Secure the image supply chain (ECR Enhanced Scanning, Cosign/Notation signing, admission verification)
- Add runtime security (GuardDuty for EKS, Falco) and audit logging (control-plane logs, CloudTrail, SIEM)
- Wire compliance accelerators (Config conformance packs, Security Hub, Artifact; Audit Manager for existing setups only — maintenance mode)
Don't use this skill for:
- Non-EKS container platforms — ECS/Fargate-without-EKS (defer to ECS security guidance) or ROSA (Red Hat manages the stack differently)
- AWS account-level / org-wide security with no EKS-specific angle (IAM org policy, SCPs, SSO, multi-service GuardDuty) → Security guidance, not this skill
- GenAI/GPU workload security specifically (model-artifact provenance, training-data confidentiality, GPU-node compliance) →
eks-genai
- Generic EKS architecture/cost/upgrade decisions with no security driver →
eks-best-practices / eks-design
- Generating Terraform/Helm (→
eks-build) or auditing a live cluster's operational posture (→ eks-operation-review)
Discovery First — the Required Questions
Do NOT recommend a hardening stack before answering these. The single most common mistake is reflexively saying "use Bottlerocket" or "use AL2023 with CIS hardening" without confirming the customer's context. The first four answers alone determine ~80% of the recommendation.
- Compliance regime(s)? None / SOC 2 / HIPAA / PCI-DSS / FedRAMP Moderate / FedRAMP High / GDPR / ISO 27001 / HITRUST / NIST 800-53/171 / CJIS / DISA IL5 — rank primary/secondary if multiple.
- Workload sensitivity? Public / internal / PII / PHI (HIPAA) / cardholder data (PCI) / federal.
- OS / AMI strategy? Open to AWS defaults / Bottlerocket-first / AL2023+CIS custom AMI / Ubuntu mandate / RHEL mandate / custom hardened / EKS Auto Mode.
- Audit timeline? None / <3 mo (urgent) / 3-6 mo / 6-12 mo / continuous.
- Cluster topology? Single vs multi-cluster, single vs multi-account, multi-region, EKS Anywhere, Hybrid Nodes, GovCloud.
- Team K8s/security skill? Low / moderate / high / mixed.
- Operational-overhead tolerance? Zero (managed-only) / low / moderate / high.
- Current security tooling baseline? None / AWS-native / third-party CNAPP / OSS / hybrid.
Full required + recommended question set, the 5 adoption-challenge archetypes, and the 8-step response framework: references/engagement-and-response.md.
The 7-Layer Security & Compliance Stack
Walk the layers bottom-up on a first engagement; each layer's controls compound on the previous.
| Layer | Focus | AWS-canonical default | Reference |
|---|
| 1 — Compute / OS / AMI | Node hardening | Bottlerocket (immutable, SELinux-enforcing, minimal); else CIS-hardened AL2023 via Image Builder; respect vendor-OS mandates (Ubuntu Pro / RHEL) | os-ami-hardening.md |
| 2 — Identity & Access | Who can do what | EKS Pod Identity (workloads) + EKS Access Entries (cluster access) | identity-and-access.md |
| 3 — Workload Security | Pod + network posture | PSA restricted + Kyverno (or OPA) + VPC CNI NetworkPolicy (default-deny) + Security Groups for Pods | workload-security.md |
| 4 — Image Supply Chain | Trust what you run | ECR Enhanced Scanning (Inspector) + Cosign/Notation signing + Kyverno verifyImages admission | image-supply-chain.md |
| 5 — Runtime Security | Detect at runtime | GuardDuty for EKS (EKS Protection + Runtime Monitoring); Falco for OSS/custom rules; findings → Security Hub | runtime-security.md |
| 6 — Audit Logging & Forensics | Prove what happened | EKS control-plane logs (audit + authenticator minimum) + CloudTrail + VPC Flow Logs + SIEM forwarding | audit-logging.md |
| 7 — Compliance Accelerators |
The AWS-canonical reference stack for a new commercial cluster: Bottlerocket (L1) + Pod Identity + Access Entries (L2) + PSA restricted + Kyverno + VPC CNI NetworkPolicy + Security Groups for Pods (L3) + ECR Enhanced Scanning + Cosign signing (L4) + GuardDuty for EKS (L5) + control-plane audit+authenticator logging + CloudTrail (L6) + Config conformance packs + Security Hub (L7; Audit Manager for existing setups only — maintenance mode). The vendor-OS path applies the same stack with a Layer-1 substitution only.
Cross-cutting concerns (span every layer, aligned to the AWS Best Practices security areas): data encryption & secrets management (default envelope encryption on K8s 1.28+, CMK, Secrets Manager/CSI/ESO) → encryption-and-secrets.md; multi-tenancy & multi-account isolation (soft vs hard, namespaces→cluster-/account-per-tenant) → multi-tenancy.md; incident response & forensics (the runbook when a detection fires) → incident-response-and-forensics.md; and the shared-responsibility model — AWS secures the control plane (control-plane nodes + etcd) and assumes more as you move self-managed → MNG → Fargate; you secure the data plane, node OS, workloads, and the controls in this skill. Each reference includes its per-layer shared-responsibility split.
Compliance-Regime Scope (cross-cutting)
EKS is natively in scope for PCI-DSS L1, HIPAA-eligible (BAA required), SOC 1/2/3, ISO 27001/27017/27018/9001, FedRAMP Moderate (commercial) and High (GovCloud only), HITRUST CSF, IRAP, C5, K-ISMS, ENS High, OSPAR, DISA IL4/IL5 (GovCloud only — commercial reaches IL2). AWS provides alignment / framework support (not independent attestation) for GDPR, NIST SP 800-53/800-171, and CJIS — the customer owns workload-level controls. Per-regime nuance, the scope table, and the worked HIPAA/PCI/FedRAMP/GDPR/Auto-Mode scenarios: references/compliance-regimes.md. Dedicated per-regime quick-starts for the three most common regimes: HIPAA, PCI DSS, SOC 2.
Always include the disclaimer in customer-facing output: "Compliance status changes over time — verify on the live AWS Services in Scope page before quoting program coverage." And precision matters: EKS is HIPAA-eligible (with a signed BAA), not "HIPAA-compliant"; FedRAMP High = GovCloud only, Moderate = commercial regions.
Securing an EKS Auto Mode Cluster
Auto Mode shifts Layer 1 (and the NetworkPolicy enforcement engine) to AWS — it is not "security handled." Facts verified 2026-07-17 against Auto Mode security considerations:
- AWS handles: node lifecycle + patching (21-day max node lifetime, weekly AMI security releases), immutable Bottlerocket-variant node OS (SELinux enforcing, read-only root, no SSH/SSM), IMDSv2 hop-limit-1, and the managed CNI / NetworkPolicy engine / EBS CSI / LB controller / pre-installed Pod Identity agent.
- You still own: PSA
restricted + Kyverno/OPA, NetworkPolicy content (default-deny), GuardDuty enablement, control-plane logging + CloudTrail + Security Hub, secrets management and the envelope-encryption CMK decision, Access Entries/IAM, image scanning/signing, workload security, and StorageClass-level EBS encryption for persistent volumes.
- Avoid Auto Mode for security when (as of 2026-07-17): a custom-AMI / baked-in-hardening mandate exists; Cilium or another alternate CNI is required; per-Pod security groups via the classic SGPP CRD are mandated (NodeClass-level Pod SGs do work on Auto Mode); host-level agents or forensic node access are mandated; or Windows nodes are needed. FIPS is not a blocker — Auto Mode offers FIPS-compatible AMIs (NodeClass
advancedSecurity.fips, US regions).
Full responsibility split, verification sources, and the stale-claim traps: references/auto-mode-security.md.
Security Baseline (non-negotiable — every recommendation includes this)
Regardless of regime, every hardening recommendation MUST include:
- EKS Pod Identity (recommended for new workloads; IRSA is a fully supported alternative — see note) — never static AWS keys
- EKS Access Entries for cluster access — never the
aws-auth ConfigMap on new clusters
- EKS control-plane logging —
audit + authenticator at minimum
- GuardDuty for EKS — EKS Protection (audit-log) + Runtime Monitoring (agent)
- ECR Enhanced Scanning on all production repositories
- Pod Security Admission
restricted on production namespaces
- NetworkPolicy default-deny on production namespaces (VPC CNI native, or Calico/Cilium on self-managed)
- Encryption at rest — EKS provides default envelope encryption of all Kubernetes API data (KMS provider v2, AWS-owned key) on K8s 1.28+ with no action required; bring a customer-managed KMS key (CMK) for control over rotation/audit, and use CMKs for EBS/S3/EFS under compliance regimes (etcd EBS volumes are also EBS-encrypted independently)
- Encryption in transit — TLS in-cluster; mTLS via service mesh for high-sensitivity workloads
- Secrets via Secrets Manager + Secrets Store CSI Driver + ASCP (or External Secrets Operator) — never plain Kubernetes Secrets in production; never baked into images
- CloudTrail for EKS API audit; private API endpoint (or restricted public CIDR allowlist) for production
- Preventive governance (multi-account): enforce the above with EKS IAM condition keys in SCPs/IAM (private endpoint, CMK encryption, approved K8s version, deletion protection) so non-compliant clusters can't be created — see identity-and-access.md
Hardening Roadmap (30 / 60 / 90)
- Days 1-30 (baseline, non-disruptive): enable control-plane
audit+authenticator logging; enable GuardDuty for EKS; enable Security Hub (CIS AWS Foundations + AWS FSBP); enable ECR Enhanced Scanning; run kube-bench for the current CIS posture. Change nothing yet — establish the baseline.
- Days 31-60 (identity + workload): migrate
aws-auth → Access Entries (planned change window, kubectl access pre-validated); migrate/justify IRSA → Pod Identity; enable PSA restricted (start audit mode → enforce); deploy Kyverno/OPA; enforce NetworkPolicy default-deny.
- Days 61-90 (OS + image + accelerators): migrate to Bottlerocket (or build CIS-hardened AL2023 via Image Builder); enable ECR image signing; enable the applicable AWS Config conformance pack (HIPAA/PCI/NIST/FedRAMP) + validate Security Hub against the compliance standard (Audit Manager existing setups only — maintenance mode; see references/compliance-accelerators.md); download attestations from AWS Artifact.
- Greenfield: deploy the full 7-layer stack at cluster creation, not retrofitted — and get the Day 0 settings below right first.
Day 0 checklist (greenfield — settings that are one-way or costly to retrofit)
Facts verified 2026-07-17 against the linked AWS docs. Only cluster name and VPC are truly immutable; the rest are changeable later but leave gaps or one-way ratchets — misstating which is which is an audit-refutable claim.
| Setting | Set at creation to | Changeable later? |
|---|
| Authentication mode | API (Access Entries only) | One-way ratchet — you can move toward the API modes but can't remove the EKS API/access entries once enabled; starting at API avoids the aws-auth migration entirely |
| Envelope-encryption CMK | Your customer-managed KMS key (default AWS-owned key applies on 1.28+ if you don't) | Can be associated later, but irreversible once set — and a disabled/deleted CMK degrades or bricks the cluster |
| Cluster name / VPC | Final values | No — immutable; a change means a new cluster |
| Kubernetes version | A current (ideally latest-1) version | Upgrade-only below creation version — no downgrade past the version the cluster was created at; post-upgrade rollback to the previous minor version exists (7-day window, one minor version); an old start burns support runway or forces extended support |
| Endpoint access | Private (or public with tight CIDR allowlist) | Yes — but every day public-by-default is exposure |
| Control-plane logging | audit + authenticator minimum | Yes — but events before enablement are unrecoverable; auditors ask for history |
Enforce all of the above org-wide with EKS IAM condition keys in SCPs — see identity-and-access.md.
Quick-Reference Decision Trees
Routing aids for the three most common either/or questions (details in the linked references). Pod Identity support matrix verified 2026-07-17 against pod-identities.html.
Pod Identity vs IRSA (identity-and-access.md):
- Fargate, Windows nodes, EKS Anywhere, or non-EKS Kubernetes → IRSA (Pod Identity runs only on Linux EC2 nodes in EKS, as of 2026-07-17)
- Cross-account → either: Pod Identity does it via target-role chaining; IRSA via direct OIDC federation (single hop, longer sessions)
- Greenfield on Linux EC2 (incl. Auto Mode) → Pod Identity
- Existing working IRSA → keep it; migrate at the next major refactor if desired
Bottlerocket vs AL2023 (os-ami-hardening.md):
- Compliance mandate → check which CIS benchmark applies (CIS Bottlerocket vs CIS AL2023 are distinct documents) before choosing
- Custom AMI / general-purpose OS / vendor kernel modules needed → AL2023 (CIS-hardened via Image Builder)
- Immutability preference, container-first, no custom-AMI need → Bottlerocket
Access Entries vs aws-auth ConfigMap (identity-and-access.md):
- New cluster → Access Entries, always (create in
API mode; never configure aws-auth)
- Existing cluster on aws-auth → migrate at the next change window (
API_AND_CONFIG_MAP transition, break-glass principal pre-validated)
Top Guardrails (the high-cost mistakes)
- Don't recommend a stack before the discovery questions — the #1 mistake.
- Don't call IRSA "legacy" — AWS docs say Pod Identity is recommended for new workloads while IRSA remains a fully supported alternative (and is the right choice on Fargate, Windows nodes, unsupported SDKs, or cross-account OIDC federation). "Legacy" applies to the
aws-auth ConfigMap, not IRSA.
- Don't use
aws-auth ConfigMap on new clusters — it's deprecated; use Access Entries (auditable in CloudTrail).
- Don't recommend PodSecurityPolicy (PSP) — removed in Kubernetes 1.25+; use PSA + Kyverno/OPA.
- Don't recommend AWS App Mesh for new work — AWS set its end-of-support date as September 30, 2026 (new sign-ups already closed; verify current status on the App Mesh page); use Istio/Linkerd/Cilium mesh or VPC Lattice.
- Don't recommend EKS Auto Mode when a hard CIS-hardened-custom-AMI requirement exists — Auto Mode doesn't support custom AMIs (as of 2026-07-17); use Bottlerocket on self-managed Karpenter NodePools. Cilium CNI is also not supported on Auto Mode. See auto-mode-security.md.
- Don't promise "HIPAA-compliant" — EKS is HIPAA-eligible; a signed BAA is required and the customer owns workload-level controls.
- Don't conflate FedRAMP Moderate (commercial) with High (GovCloud); FIPS 140-3 (Bottlerocket FIPS AMIs) with 140-2; or CIS AL2 with CIS AL2023 benchmarks (distinct documents).
- Don't treat a CMK as free of operational risk — once a CMK is the envelope-encryption key, disabling it degrades the cluster (the API server can't boot on restart; ~30-day window to re-enable before forced auto-upgrade) and deleting it makes the cluster unrecoverable. Guard the CMK with least-privilege IAM + a CloudWatch alarm.
- Don't synthesize compliance claims — cite an AWS-published source or recommend escalation.
Escalation
Create a SpecReq / escalate for: first-time certification on a mission-critical regulated workload; XXL+ segment; FedRAMP High / GovCloud; Top Secret/Secret (out of scope here); EKS Anywhere or Hybrid Nodes inside a FedRAMP boundary; multi-tenant SaaS with cross-tenant PHI/cardholder/federal isolation; customer-vs-auditor disagreement on AWS-managed-control acceptability; or any claim you cannot ground. Full criteria: references/engagement-and-response.md.
How to Use the References
Progressive disclosure — the essentials are above; load a reference only when the task needs that depth:
| Reference | Load when the task is about… |
|---|
| engagement-and-response.md | Full discovery question set, adoption-challenge archetypes, the 8-step response framework, escalation criteria |
| os-ami-hardening.md | Layer 1 — Bottlerocket vs AL2023 vs Ubuntu/RHEL, CIS benchmark hierarchy, Image Builder hardened-AMI pipeline, FIPS |
| auto-mode-security.md | Securing an EKS Auto Mode cluster — AWS-handled vs customer-owned controls, when to avoid Auto Mode for security |
| identity-and-access.md | Layer 2 — Pod Identity vs IRSA, Access Entries vs aws-auth, access policies |
| workload-security.md | Layer 3 — PSA, Kyverno/OPA, NetworkPolicy, Security Groups for Pods, service-mesh mTLS |
| image-supply-chain.md | Layer 4 — ECR Enhanced Scanning, Cosign/Notation signing, admission control, third-party scanners |
| runtime-security.md | Layer 5 — GuardDuty for EKS, Falco, Security Hub aggregation |
| audit-logging.md | Layer 6 — control-plane log types, CloudTrail, VPC Flow Logs, SIEM forwarding, retention |
| compliance-accelerators.md | Layer 7 — Config conformance packs, Security Hub, Artifact, Audit Manager (maintenance mode), kube-bench |
| encryption-and-secrets.md | Default envelope encryption (KMS v2), CMK + its operational risk, EBS/EFS/FSx encryption, Secrets Manager/CSI/ESO/Sealed Secrets, secret hygiene |
Sources
