One namespace still ignores the webhook after the manifest was hardened.
An admission webhook manifest is updated and one namespace still ignores it because the old failurePolicy survives in a shadow copy
The live manifest is strict, but one shadow object still carries the earlier failurePolicy and gets selected by the API server cache.
Scenario
What to check first
- Identify the primary failure signal in the The Rulebook Was Tightened and One Inspector Pulled the Carbon Copy From the Drawer Marked Drafts scenario.
- Separate visible symptoms from the underlying technical dependency.
- Describe the safest recovery path and the follow-up prevention work.
Checking checklist
- Summarize the current impact and the last known change.
- Collect direct evidence from logs, runtime state, and configuration before changing anything.
- Separate immediate recovery from permanent prevention work.
Recovery and prevention
Inspect shadow admission objects before widening selectors.
Questions worth viewing together
No. Keep commands, logs, file names, APIs, and product names unchanged, then explain the reasoning in the selected UI language.
State the root cause, the evidence that supports it, and the safest recovery direction.
The source scenario is treated as an incident artifact. Guidance, checklist, hints, and explanations can be localized around it.
Similar cases seen in the field