Skip to content

fix: correct security context UIDs to match Sequin image (1000, not 1001)#11

Open
o6uoq wants to merge 1 commit intosequinstream:mainfrom
o6uoq:fix/security-context-uid
Open

fix: correct security context UIDs to match Sequin image (1000, not 1001)#11
o6uoq wants to merge 1 commit intosequinstream:mainfrom
o6uoq:fix/security-context-uid

Conversation

@o6uoq
Copy link
Copy Markdown

@o6uoq o6uoq commented Apr 23, 2026

Problem

The chart defaults containerSecurityContext.runAsUser, runAsGroup, and podSecurityContext.fsGroup to 1001 (Bitnami convention for Bitnami-built images). However, the Sequin Docker image (sequin/sequin) creates its app user with UID/GID 1000 — the default assigned by useradd --create-home app in the Dockerfile. This mismatch causes permission errors on fresh installs unless users disable both security contexts.

Fix

Change three values in values.yaml:

Value From To
podSecurityContext.fsGroup 1001 1000
containerSecurityContext.runAsUser 1001 1000
containerSecurityContext.runAsGroup 1001 1000

Backward compatibility

  • Users who already set containerSecurityContext.enabled: false / podSecurityContext.enabled: false as a workaround are unaffected — their overrides still take effect.
  • OpenShift deployments using adaptSecurityContext: auto are unaffected — the platform overrides UIDs.

Verification

$ docker run --rm --entrypoint id sequin/sequin:latest
uid=1000(app) gid=1000(app) groups=1000(app)

Testing

  • helm lint . — passes
  • helm template | kubectl apply --dry-run=server — all manifests valid
  • Kind cluster end-to-end: kubectl exec deploy/sequin-test -- id returns uid=1000(app) gid=1000(app)
  • No permission errors in container logs

… 1001)

The Sequin Docker image (sequin/sequin) creates its `app` user via
`useradd --create-home app` which assigns UID/GID 1000 on Debian.
The chart defaults were set to 1001 (Bitnami convention for
Bitnami-built images), causing permission errors on fresh installs.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
@o6uoq o6uoq marked this pull request as ready for review April 23, 2026 10:49
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant