Skip to content

Security - Backend Audit (PII)

Archived record

This page describes the Firebase-era platform or a migration step that has completed. It is kept as history and is not a current runbook. The current platform is described from the home page.

Superseded note (2026-06-11): the platform/ansible VPS stack referenced below (Ansible roles, ArgoCD, k3s/kubeadm, RabbitMQ) was removed in v1.5.0; labs now run on the Hostinger VPS labs platform (see labs-platform-guide.md). This audit is preserved as a historical record.

Document Version: 1.1 Generated: February 10, 2026 Source: infrastructure-backend-gitops.md Review Status: COMPREHENSIVE MULTI-PERSONA ASSESSMENT Reviewed By: CGOA, GHE, GPCA, GDEF Overall Assessment: ⚠️ REQUIRES PHASE 1 ENHANCEMENTS BEFORE IMPLEMENTATION Maturity Score: 72/100 (DEVELOPMENT-READY, NOT PRODUCTION-READY)

Executive Summary

The infra-backend-plan.md document presents a comprehensive "Zero-to-Production" infrastructure design using Terraform (provisioning), Ansible (configuration), and ArgoCD (GitOps CD) on a Hostinger VPS. The plan demonstrates strong theoretical alignment with CKA, CKAD, CAPA, and CGOA principles, but requires significant practical enhancements and security hardening before production deployment.

Key Strengths

  • ✅ Clear two-repository GitOps model (app-repo + gitops-repo separation)
  • ✅ Comprehensive Helm + Kustomize layering approach
  • ✅ Well-defined naming conventions across all components
  • ✅ Strong conceptual alignment with GitOps principles
  • ✅ Includes K3s deployment (lightweight for single VPS)
  • ✅ Addresses Terraform, Ansible, GitHub Actions integration

Critical Gaps

  • 🔴 No Terraform code provided - only requirements
  • 🔴 No Ansible playbooks/roles - only outline
  • 🔴 No actual YAML manifests - only structure
  • 🔴 Hostinger provider not validated - uses hypothetical integration
  • 🔴 No disaster recovery procedures - backup strategy missing
  • 🔴 No high-availability guidance - single-node design limits scalability
  • 🔴 No cost estimation - Hostinger pricing not addressed

Recommendation: Document is architecturally sound but requires Phase 1 implementation of all code deliverables before any production use.

1. CGOA (GitOps Certified Associate) Review

Role: GitOps Best Practices & Compliance

Assessment: ⚠️ CONDITIONAL (76/100)

Key Findings:

✅ Strengths
  1. Two-Repository Model (CRITICAL)
  2. Requirement: Clear separation between app-repo (CI source) and gitops-repo (CD source)
  3. Implementation: ✅ Well-defined in document
  4. Evidence: Section 4.4.1 clearly separates responsibilities

  5. Status: COMPLIANT WITH REQUIREMENTS

  6. GitOps Repo as Source of Truth

  7. Document states: "Argo CD (in cluster) → Polls GitOps Repo → Syncs Deployment"
  8. Assessment: Clear source of truth model

  9. Status: EXCELLENT

  10. Declarative Configuration Throughout

  11. Terraform: IaC (declarative)
  12. Ansible: Configuration management (declarative)
  13. Kustomize: Overlays (declarative)
  14. Helm: Package management (declarative)

  15. Status: EXCELLENT

  16. Environment Separation

  17. dev and prod overlays clearly defined
  18. Separate namespaces per environment

  19. Status: GOOD

  20. Naming Convention Clarity

  21. Comprehensive Section 5 defining standards
  22. Kebab-case for K8s resources, snake_case for Terraform/Ansible
  23. Applied consistently through examples
  24. Status: EXCELLENT
⚠️ Critical Gaps
  1. No Actual GitOps Repo Code
  2. Missing: Complete gitops-repo structure with manifests
  3. Missing: Sample k8s/base/ manifests
  4. Missing: Sample overlays/dev/ and overlays/prod/ configurations
  5. Missing: Sample charts/demo-app/ Helm chart
  6. Impact: Cannot validate GitOps implementation
  7. Required: Provide complete, working gitops-repo template

  8. Severity: CRITICAL

  9. No Terraform Code

  10. Missing: terraform/main.tf implementation
  11. Missing: terraform/variables.tf with actual variables
  12. Missing: terraform/outputs.tf
  13. Missing: Hostinger provider configuration
  14. Impact: Cannot provision infrastructure
  15. Required: Complete, tested Terraform configuration

  16. Severity: CRITICAL

  17. No Ansible Playbooks

  18. Missing: ansible/site.yml playbook
  19. Missing: ansible/roles/security/ implementation
  20. Missing: ansible/roles/runtime/ implementation
  21. Missing: ansible/roles/k3s_cluster/ implementation
  22. Missing: ansible/roles/argocd/ implementation
  23. Impact: Cannot bootstrap cluster
  24. Required: Complete, tested Ansible roles

  25. Severity: CRITICAL

  26. No Disaster Recovery

  27. Missing: Backup procedures for GitOps repo
  28. Missing: Backup procedures for cluster state
  29. Missing: Backup procedures for ArgoCD configuration
  30. Missing: Recovery procedures from backup
  31. Impact: Single point of failure
  32. Required: Add disaster recovery section

  33. Severity: HIGH

  34. Missing ArgoCD RBAC

  35. Missing: Service account definitions
  36. Missing: Role/RoleBinding configurations
  37. Missing: GitOps repo access permissions
  38. Impact: Not least-privilege compliant
  39. Required: Add RBAC definitions
  40. Severity: HIGH
🟡 Medium Issues
  1. Single-Node K3s Limitation
  2. Current: Described as single-VPS design
  3. Missing: High-availability guidance
  4. Missing: Multi-node expansion roadmap
  5. Impact: Not production-ready for critical workloads
  6. Recommendation: Document HA requirements for Phase 2

  7. Timeline: Phase 2

  8. No Multi-Cluster Strategy

  9. Missing: How to scale to multiple VPS nodes
  10. Missing: Multi-cluster ArgoCD setup
  11. Missing: Cross-cluster networking
  12. Recommendation: Document multi-cluster roadmap
  13. Timeline: Phase 3

2. GHE (GitHub Expert) Review

Role: GitHub Actions & Secrets Best Practices

Assessment: ⚠️ NEEDS WORK (68/100)

Key Findings:

✅ Strengths
  1. GitHub Actions Workflow Outlined
  2. Document specifies requirements in Section 4.4.2
  3. Covers: Trigger, Build, Login, Tag/Push, Update GitOps
  4. Assessment: Logical flow is correct

  5. Status: GOOD OUTLINE

  6. Secret Management Awareness

  7. Document mentions: CR_PAT, GITOPS_PAT, HOSTINGER_API_KEY
  8. Document states: "secrets must never be committed to Git"

  9. Status: AWARE OF BEST PRACTICES

  10. GHCR Integration

  11. Document specifies GHCR for image storage
  12. Clear image naming: ghcr.io//:

  13. Status: CORRECT

  14. GitHub Secrets Usage

  15. Document acknowledges need for CR_PAT and GITOPS_PAT
  16. States users must configure these themselves
  17. Status: ACKNOWLEDGED
🔴 Critical Gaps
  1. No Actual GitHub Actions Workflow
  2. Missing: Complete .github/workflows/ci.yml file
  3. Missing: Example with actual GitHub Actions syntax
  4. Missing: Shell script for GitOps repo update
  5. Missing: Error handling and retry logic
  6. Impact: Cannot implement CI pipeline
  7. Required: Complete, working ci.yml workflow

  8. Severity: CRITICAL

  9. No Secret Rotation Strategy

  10. Missing: CR_PAT rotation frequency
  11. Missing: GITOPS_PAT rotation frequency
  12. Missing: HOSTINGER_API_KEY rotation frequency
  13. Missing: Automation for secret rotation
  14. Impact: Long-lived credentials pose security risk
  15. Required: Add secret rotation procedure

  16. Severity: HIGH

  17. No GitHub OIDC Discussion

  18. Missing: OIDC as alternative to PAT tokens
  19. Missing: Guidance on modern authentication
  20. Impact: Outdated authentication approach
  21. Recommendation: Add OIDC option to Phase 2

  22. Timeline: Phase 2

  23. No Branch Protection Configuration

  24. Missing: Recommended branch rules for main branch
  25. Missing: PR review requirements
  26. Missing: Status check enforcement
  27. Impact: Risk of unreviewed deployments
  28. Required: Add branch protection guidance

  29. Severity: HIGH

  30. No Self-Hosted Runner Discussion

  31. Document mentions: "self-hosted runner recommended if..."
  32. Missing: Complete guidance on setup
  33. Missing: Security considerations for self-hosted
  34. Missing: Comparison with GitHub-hosted runners
  35. Impact: Unclear which runner to use
  36. Required: Add complete runner guidance
  37. Severity: MEDIUM
⚠️ Medium Issues
  1. No Container Image Scanning
  2. Missing: Trivy or GHSA integration
  3. Missing: Vulnerability scanning in CI
  4. Recommendation: Add image scanning step

  5. Timeline: Phase 1

  6. No Artifact Attestation

  7. Missing: Image signing/verification
  8. Missing: Provenance tracking
  9. Recommendation: Add cosign/attestation

  10. Timeline: Phase 2

  11. No Workflow Concurrency Control

  12. Risk: Multiple concurrent builds could conflict
  13. Missing: concurrency group configuration
  14. Recommendation: Add concurrency control
  15. Timeline: Phase 1

3. GPCA (Google Professional Cloud Architect) Review

Role: Architecture, Scalability & Design Patterns

Assessment: ⚠️ REQUIRES ENHANCEMENTS (70/100)

Key Findings:

✅ Strengths
  1. Clear Architecture Layers
  2. Infrastructure: Terraform/Hostinger
  3. Configuration: Ansible
  4. Container Runtime: Docker/Containerd
  5. Orchestration: K3s/Kubernetes
  6. CD: ArgoCD
  7. Assessment: Proper separation of concerns

  8. Status: GOOD

  9. Environment Stratification

  10. dev (development environment)
  11. prod (production environment)
  12. Assessment: Enables different policies per environment

  13. Status: GOOD

  14. Helm + Kustomize Layering

  15. Base configuration in Helm values.yaml
  16. Environment-specific in values-dev.yaml, values-prod.yaml
  17. Overlay support for patches
  18. Assessment: Flexible, extensible approach

  19. Status: EXCELLENT

  20. Container Runtime Choice

  21. K3s (recommended) or kubeadm acceptable
  22. Using containerd CRI
  23. Assessment: Good runtime options
  24. Status: GOOD
🔴 Critical Gaps
  1. No Hostinger Provider Code
  2. Missing: Actual Terraform provider configuration
  3. Missing: VPS provisioning details
  4. Missing: How Hostinger API is called
  5. Missing: Error handling for provider
  6. Impact: Cannot provision infrastructure
  7. Required: Complete Hostinger Terraform integration

  8. Severity: CRITICAL

  9. No Ansible Implementation

  10. Missing: Complete playbook code
  11. Missing: Role implementations
  12. Missing: Task definitions
  13. Missing: Handler definitions
  14. Missing: Variable specifications
  15. Impact: Cannot bootstrap cluster
  16. Required: Complete, tested Ansible playbooks

  17. Severity: CRITICAL

  18. Single-Node Architecture Limitation

  19. Current: Single Hostinger VPS
  20. Missing: HA configuration
  21. Missing: Multi-node setup
  22. Missing: Load balancing
  23. Impact: Single point of failure
  24. Recommendation: Phase 2 HA architecture

  25. Severity: HIGH

  26. No Networking Architecture

  27. Missing: VPC/network configuration
  28. Missing: Firewall rules details
  29. Missing: Ingress setup
  30. Missing: DNS management
  31. Impact: External access unclear
  32. Required: Document networking architecture

  33. Severity: HIGH

  34. No Storage Architecture

  35. Missing: Persistent volume configuration
  36. Missing: Storage class definitions
  37. Missing: Database persistence strategy
  38. Impact: Data loss risk
  39. Required: Add storage architecture

  40. Severity: HIGH

  41. No Cost Optimization

  42. Missing: Hostinger pricing analysis
  43. Missing: Resource sizing guidance
  44. Missing: Cost estimation
  45. Missing: Cost monitoring
  46. Impact: Unexpected billing
  47. Required: Add cost estimation section
  48. Severity: MEDIUM
🟡 Medium Issues
  1. No Observability Architecture
  2. Missing: Logging strategy
  3. Missing: Monitoring setup (Prometheus/Grafana)
  4. Missing: Alerting configuration
  5. Missing: Application metrics
  6. Recommendation: Add monitoring Phase 2

  7. Timeline: Phase 2

  8. No Security Architecture

  9. Missing: Network policies
  10. Missing: Pod security standards
  11. Missing: RBAC details
  12. Missing: Secret management strategy
  13. Recommendation: Add security hardening Phase 1

  14. Timeline: Phase 1

  15. No Backup/DR Architecture

  16. Missing: Backup strategy
  17. Missing: Disaster recovery procedures
  18. Missing: RTO/RPO targets
  19. Missing: Restoration procedures
  20. Recommendation: Add backup procedures Phase 1
  21. Timeline: Phase 1

4. GDEF (Google Developer Expert Firebase) Review

Role: Firebase Integration & Best Practices

Assessment: ⓘ NOT APPLICABLE (N/A)

Note: The infra-backend-plan.md document focuses on infrastructure provisioning and does not explicitly address Firebase integration. This review assesses Firebase compatibility and integration opportunities.

Key Findings:

ⓘ Applicability Assessment

This document describes:

  • ✅ Infrastructure provisioning (Terraform)
  • ✅ Cluster bootstrap (Ansible)
  • ✅ Container orchestration (K3s)
  • ✅ CI/CD pipelines (GitHub Actions + ArgoCD)
  • ✗ NOT Firebase-specific - Self-managed Kubernetes infrastructure

Current Context from Project:

  • Frontend: Firebase Hosting (React SPA)
  • Secrets: Notion database
  • Current Project: SELF-MANAGED KUBERNETES BACKEND (VPS Stage 0)
✅ Compatibility Notes
  1. Kubernetes Backend ↔ Firebase Frontend
  2. Architecture allows: Kubernetes backend serving APIs to Firebase-hosted frontend
  3. CORS: Properly configured in backend apps
  4. Authentication: Firebase Auth tokens can be verified in backend

  5. Status: COMPATIBLE

  6. If Migrating Backend to Cloud Run

  7. This plan could be adapted to Cloud Run instead of self-managed K8s
  8. Cloud Run benefits: Reduced ops overhead, automatic scaling
  9. Trade-off: Less control, different deployment model

  10. Status: POSSIBLE FUTURE CONSIDERATION

  11. Firebase Realtime Features

  12. This backend could use Firestore/Realtime Database
  13. Admin SDK integration possible from backend
  14. Status: COMPATIBLE
🟡 Conditional Recommendations
  1. If Using Firestore as Database
  2. Add Firestore Admin SDK to app
  3. Manage service account key as K8s secret
  4. Document credential injection

  5. Timeline: Implementation-specific

  6. If Using Firebase Storage

  7. Add Firebase Storage integration to backend
  8. Document service account permissions

  9. Timeline: Implementation-specific

  10. Cloud Functions Alternative

  11. Instead of backend on K8s, consider Cloud Functions
  12. Lower operational overhead
  13. Automatic scaling
  14. Recommendation: Phase 2 evaluation

Cross-Cutting Concerns Assessment

1. Implementation Completeness

Overall: 🔴 INCOMPLETE (40/100)

What's Provided:

  • ✅ Architecture diagrams (text)
  • ✅ Requirements specifications
  • ✅ Naming conventions
  • ✅ Best practices guidance
  • ✅ High-level workflow descriptions

What's Missing:

  • 🔴 Terraform code (0% - outline only)
  • 🔴 Ansible code (0% - outline only)
  • 🔴 GitHub Actions workflow (0% - outline only)
  • 🔴 Kubernetes manifests (0% - outline only)
  • 🔴 Helm chart (0% - outline only)
  • 🔴 Sample application code (0% - outline only)

Impact: This document is a specification not an implementation guide. Cannot be used without developing all code from scratch.

2. Security Posture

Overall: ⚠️ INCOMPLETE (65/100)

Addressed:

  • ✅ SSH key-based authentication (specified in requirements)
  • ✅ UFW firewall (specified in requirements)
  • ✅ Root SSH disable (specified in requirements)
  • ✅ Secret handling awareness (mentioned in best practices)

Missing:

  • 🔴 Network policies (no code)
  • 🔴 Pod security standards (no code)
  • 🔴 RBAC configuration (no code)
  • 🔴 Secret rotation procedures (not defined)
  • 🔴 Audit logging (not addressed)
  • 🔴 Backup encryption (not addressed)

Recommendations:

  1. Add Pod Security Standards to Ansible
  2. Add Network Policies to manifests
  3. Add RBAC definitions to ArgoCD setup
  4. Document secret rotation procedures

3. Operational Readiness

Overall: ⚠️ NEEDS WORK (60/100)

Addressed:

  • ✅ Multi-environment support (dev/prod)
  • ✅ GitOps workflow described
  • ✅ Argo CD setup outlined

Missing:

  • 🔴 Backup procedures (critical)
  • 🔴 Disaster recovery procedures (critical)
  • 🔴 Monitoring setup (important)
  • 🔴 Logging configuration (important)
  • 🔴 Alerting rules (important)
  • 🔴 Runbooks for common tasks (important)
  • 🔴 Troubleshooting guide (important)

Recommendations:

  1. Add backup procedure (Phase 1)
  2. Add disaster recovery procedure (Phase 1)
  3. Add monitoring setup (Phase 2)
  4. Add operational runbooks (Phase 2)

4. Scalability & HA

Overall: ⚠️ SINGLE-NODE ONLY (50/100)

Current Design:

  • Single Hostinger VPS
  • Single K3s node
  • No high availability
  • No load balancing

Limitations:

  • Single point of failure
  • No redundancy
  • Cannot handle node failure
  • Limited to single-node performance

Recommendations:

  1. Document HA requirements (Phase 2)
  2. Plan multi-node expansion (Phase 2)
  3. Add load balancer configuration (Phase 2)
  4. Document auto-recovery procedures (Phase 2)

Critical Issues Summary

🔴 CRITICAL (Blocking Implementation) - Count: 6

Issue Category Impact Must-Fix
No Terraform code Infrastructure Cannot provision VPS YES
No Ansible playbooks Configuration Cannot bootstrap cluster YES
No GitHub Actions workflow CI/CD Cannot build/push images YES
No Kubernetes manifests Deployment Cannot deploy applications YES
No Helm chart Deployment Cannot manage releases YES
No Hostinger integration Infrastructure Cannot interact with provider YES

Status: Document is architecture only, not executable implementation.

Medium Issues Summary

🟡 MEDIUM (Phase 1 Enhancements) - Count: 8

Priority Category Issue Impact Timeline
1 Operations No backup procedures Data loss risk Phase 1
2 Operations No disaster recovery Extended downtime Phase 1
3 Security No secret rotation documented Long-lived credentials Phase 1
4 Security No Pod Security Standards Elevated privileges Phase 1
5 Ops No monitoring setup Blind to issues Phase 2
6 Ops No branch protection rules Unreviewed deployments Phase 1
7 Architecture No HA architecture Single point of failure Phase 2
8 Operations No runbooks Manual troubleshooting Phase 2

Recommendations by Persona

CGOA (GitOps) Recommendations

PHASE 1 (CRITICAL):

  1. Provide complete gitops-repo structure with sample manifests
  2. Provide complete Helm chart with values files
  3. Add disaster recovery procedures for GitOps repo
  4. Add RBAC definitions for ArgoCD service accounts
  5. Define backup strategy for cluster state

PHASE 2:

  1. Add multi-cluster ArgoCD setup guidance
  2. Document HA considerations
  3. Add ArgoCD Notifications Controller setup

GHE (GitHub) Recommendations

PHASE 1 (CRITICAL):

  1. Provide complete .github/workflows/ci.yml file
  2. Add GitHub secrets configuration guide
  3. Add branch protection rules specification
  4. Document secret rotation procedures
  5. Add container image scanning step

PHASE 2:

  1. Migrate from PAT to OIDC authentication
  2. Add artifact attestation/signing
  3. Implement self-hosted runner guidance

GPCA (Architecture) Recommendations

PHASE 1 (CRITICAL):

  1. Provide complete terraform/ directory with all files
  2. Provide complete ansible/ directory with all playbooks/roles
  3. Document networking architecture (VPC, firewall, DNS)
  4. Document storage architecture (PV, SC, databases)
  5. Add security architecture (network policies, RBAC, PSS)

PHASE 2:

  1. Add observability architecture (Prometheus, Grafana, logging)
  2. Design HA architecture for multi-node
  3. Add disaster recovery architecture
  4. Plan scaling to multiple clusters

GDEF (Firebase) Recommendations

CONDITIONAL (If Using Firebase):

  1. Document Firestore integration with backend
  2. Document Firebase Auth token verification
  3. Document Firebase Storage integration
  4. Document Cloud Functions as alternative

OPTIONAL:

  1. Evaluate Cloud Run vs self-managed Kubernetes
  2. Cost comparison: Cloud Run vs Hostinger VPS K8s

Implementation Roadmap

Phase 1: Core Implementation (CRITICAL - Must Complete)

Must Complete Before Any Deployment:

  1. ✅ Terraform Infrastructure Code
  2. terraform/main.tf - Hostinger VPS provisioning
  3. terraform/variables.tf - Input variables
  4. terraform/outputs.tf - VPS IP and connection info
  5. Provider: Hostinger API integration

  6. Estimated: 3-5 days

  7. ✅ Ansible Configuration

  8. ansible/site.yml - Main playbook
  9. ansible/roles/security - SSH, UFW, hardening
  10. ansible/roles/runtime - Docker, containerd
  11. ansible/roles/k3s_cluster - K3s bootstrap
  12. ansible/roles/argocd - ArgoCD setup

  13. Estimated: 4-6 days

  14. ✅ GitHub Actions Workflow

  15. .github/workflows/ci.yml - Complete CI pipeline
  16. Build, push, GitOps update steps
  17. Error handling and retry logic

  18. Estimated: 2-3 days

  19. ✅ Kubernetes Manifests

  20. k8s/base/deployment.yaml
  21. k8s/base/service.yaml
  22. k8s/overlays/dev/ and prod/

  23. Estimated: 2-3 days

  24. ✅ Helm Chart

  25. charts/demo-app/Chart.yaml
  26. charts/demo-app/values.yaml
  27. charts/demo-app/values-dev.yaml
  28. charts/demo-app/values-prod.yaml
  29. templates/deployment.yaml, service.yaml

  30. Estimated: 2-3 days

  31. ✅ Security Hardening

  32. Network policies for K8s
  33. Pod security standards
  34. RBAC configurations
  35. Secret management procedures

  36. Estimated: 2-3 days

  37. ✅ Backup & DR Procedures

  38. Backup scripts for GitOps repo
  39. Backup scripts for cluster state
  40. Restoration procedures
  41. Test DR process

  42. Estimated: 2-3 days

  43. ✅ Documentation

  44. Deployment guide
  45. Operational runbooks
  46. Troubleshooting guide
  47. Secret management guide
  48. Estimated: 2-3 days

Total Phase 1 Effort: 19-30 days

  1. ✅ Monitoring & Observability
  2. Prometheus setup
  3. Grafana dashboards
  4. Alerting rules

  5. Estimated: 3-5 days

  6. ✅ High-Availability Architecture

  7. Multi-node K3s setup
  8. Load balancing
  9. etcd backup

  10. Estimated: 5-7 days

  11. ✅ OIDC Migration

  12. GitHub OIDC setup
  13. Replace PAT tokens
  14. Eliminate rotation requirement

  15. Estimated: 2-3 days

  16. ✅ Multi-Cluster ArgoCD

  17. Cross-cluster applications
  18. Hub-spoke model
  19. Estimated: 3-4 days

Phase 3: Advanced Features (FUTURE)

  1. ✅ Service Mesh
  2. Istio or Linkerd
  3. Traffic management

  4. Estimated: 4-6 days

  5. ✅ Policy Engine

  6. Kyverno setup
  7. Policy enforcement

  8. Estimated: 2-3 days

  9. ✅ Advanced Disaster Recovery

  10. Velero backup solution
  11. Cross-region replication
  12. Estimated: 3-5 days

Sign-Off & Approval

Individual Persona Approvals

Persona Name Assessment Status Date
CGOA GitOps Certified Associate ⚠️ CONDITIONAL Requires all code deliverables Phase 1 2026-02-06
GHE GitHub Expert ⚠️ CONDITIONAL Requires complete ci.yml and secret procedures 2026-02-06
GPCA Google Professional Cloud Architect ⚠️ CONDITIONAL Requires Terraform and Ansible implementations 2026-02-06
GDEF Google Developer Expert Firebase ⓘ N/A Not directly applicable; compatible for integration 2026-02-06

Overall PII Status

NOT APPROVED FOR DEPLOYMENT 🔴

Status: Architecture specification requires full implementation before production use

Conditions for Approval:

  1. Complete all Phase 1 critical code deliverables
  2. Implement all Phase 1 security hardening
  3. Add operational backup/DR procedures
  4. Provide complete Terraform, Ansible, and workflow code
  5. Test all procedures (deployment, backup, recovery)
  6. Complete operational documentation

Timeline to Approval: 3-4 weeks (with team of 1-2 engineers) Maturity Score: 72/100 (DEVELOPMENT-READY)

Appendix A: Critical Deliverables Checklist

Code Deliverables (0/6 Complete)

  • terraform/main.tf (VPS provisioning)
  • ansible/site.yml (cluster bootstrap)
  • .github/workflows/ci.yml (CI pipeline)
  • k8s/base/deployment.yaml (K8s manifest)
  • charts/demo-app/ (Helm chart)
  • k8s/overlays/dev/ and prod/ (Kustomize overlays)

Security Deliverables (0/4 Complete)

  • Network policies (K8s)
  • Pod security standards (YAML)
  • RBAC definitions (ArgoCD + cluster)
  • Secret rotation procedures (docs)

Operational Deliverables (0/4 Complete)

  • Backup procedures (scripts + docs)
  • Disaster recovery procedures (scripts + docs)
  • Operational runbooks (docs)
  • Troubleshooting guide (docs)

Documentation (0/3 Complete)

  • Deployment guide (step-by-step)
  • Architecture decision records
  • Hostinger integration guide
  • pipeline-deployment-plan.md - CI/CD pipeline architecture
  • pipeline-deployment-pii-review.md - Pipeline review findings
  • secrets-infrastructure.md - Secret management for credentials
  • todo.md - Implementation roadmap

Document Owner: Multi-Persona Architecture Review Board Review Frequency: After Phase 1 implementation Last Updated: 2026-02-06 Status: 🔴 REQUIRES IMPLEMENTATION - Not approved for deployment