Conclusion
What you built
Over this workshop, you managed a complete vulnerability lifecycle:
| Phase | What Happened | AAP Capabilities Used |
|---|---|---|
DEFEND |
Critical CVE detected → automated containment in seconds |
EDA webhooks, rulebooks, workflow triggers, firewalld, SELinux |
CONTAIN |
Errata published → OPA policy-gated patch with approval and evidence |
Workflow templates, approval nodes, OPA queries, set_stats, reporting |
COMPLY |
System audited → CIS-hardened → evidence generated → container delivered |
OPA compliance queries, sysctl/SSH/service hardening, HTML reporting, Podman build/scan/push |
Business outcomes demonstrated
-
Mean-time-to-contain: From 45+ minutes (manual SSH) to seconds (EDA + workflow)
-
Policy enforcement: Zero patches applied without passing OPA policy gates
-
Audit readiness: Compliance reports generated automatically with before/after evidence
-
Provable compliance: 13 OPA-audited, CIS-hardened controls with per-control pass/fail
-
Supply chain trust: Every container image traceable to specific advisory remediation
Architecture recap
The complete flow you automated:
Splunk Alert → EDA Webhook → Containment Workflow
↓
Patch Available Notification
↓
OPA Policy Gate → Approval → Patch → Verify → Report
↓
Compliance Audit → CIS Harden → Re-Audit → Report
↓
Container Build → Scan → Push
Taking this further
-
Scale: Add more hosts to inventory and use job slicing for parallel patching
-
Real Splunk: Replace the simulated webhook with a live Splunk HEC integration
-
Image signing: Add
cosignsigning to the supply chain (provenance attestation) -
GitOps: Trigger container builds from Git commits to the Containerfile
-
ITSM integration: Connect approval nodes to ServiceNow or Jira for change tickets
-
Extended compliance: Add SCAP or OpenSCAP scanning alongside OPA policy checks