Add Control for BSI SYS 1.6

[sluetze]

Description:

adding the review remarks:

1. introduce versioning for bsi profile (ocp4, ocp4-node and rhoccs)
2. utilize control file for rhocs profile
3. add missing references

Rationale:

sys.1.6 (containerization) is the second part of the relevant building blocks of BSI for container platforms.

Review Hints:

this is to be merged after https://github.com/ComplianceAsCode/content/pull/11394

[openshift-ci[bot]]

Hi @sluetze. Thanks for your PR.

I'm waiting for a ComplianceAsCode member to verify that this patch is reasonable to test. If it is, they should reply with /ok-to-test on its own line. Until that is done, I will not automatically test new commits in this PR, but the usual testing commands by org members will still work. Regular contributors should join the org to skip this step.

Once the patch is verified, the new status will be reflected by the ok-to-test label.

I understand the commands that are listed here.

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository.

[github-actions[bot]]

Start a new ephemeral environment with changes proposed in this pull request:

Fedora Environment

Oracle Linux 8 Environment

[yuumasato]

@sluetze I see that one commit for APP.4.4.A4 was added. Was that intentional?

[sluetze]

@sluetze I see that one commit for APP.4.4.A4 was added. Was that intentional?

@yuumasato yes this is intentional. Since this PR addresses the review marks of https://github.com/ComplianceAsCode/content/pull/11342, i also fixed the issue, that the rules are splitted across multiple profiles. before this PR the rules of APP.4.4 were in the rhcos bsi profile, which made them invisible in the ocp bsi profile. Now we have the rules also in the ocp profile while keeping the variables in the rhcos profile because putting them in the ocp profile results in errors. by doing this fix I recognized, that we missed some of the rules of APP.4.4.A4 beforehand, so I also added them here.

The error was in our first PR (see above) where we did not only provide the control file + profile but also added some rules to the controls which were incomplete.

Also the references were not put in place in the last PR so i fixed that.

[sluetze]

rebased to fix merge conflicts.

[github-actions[bot]]

:robot: A k8s content image for this PR is available at: ghcr.io/complianceascode/k8scontent:11437

Click here to see how to deploy it

If you alread have Compliance Operator deployed: utils/build_ds_container.py -i ghcr.io/complianceascode/k8scontent:11437

Otherwise deploy the content and operator together by checking out ComplianceAsCode/compliance-operator and: CONTENT_IMAGE=ghcr.io/complianceascode/k8scontent:11437 make deploy-local

[qlty-cloud-legacy[bot]]

Code Climate has analyzed commit e17a17c9 and detected 0 issues on this pull request.

The test coverage on the diff in this pull request is 100.0% (50% is the threshold).

This pull request will bring the total coverage in the repository to 58.1% (0.0% change).

View more on Code Climate.

[yuumasato]

There are no maintainers in Oracle group, overriding and merging, :)

[yuumasato]

Err, re-running the testing-farm jobs that failed.

[yuumasato]

Thank you @sluetze!