Portieris pod not getting deployed

[vishal662]

What commit ID of Portieris did you experience the problem with?

What went wrong?

2021-12-30 04:51:09.119694 I | proto: duplicate proto type registered: google.protobuf.Any
2021-12-30 04:51:09.119750 I | proto: duplicate proto type registered: google.protobuf.Duration
2021-12-30 04:51:09.119763 I | proto: duplicate proto type registered: google.protobuf.Timestamp
Error from server (Forbidden): error when applying patch:
{"metadata":{"annotations":{},"namespace":""},"spec":{}}
to:
&{0xc4200852c0 0xc420cee000 imagepolicies.securityenforcement.admission.cloud.ibm.com /tmp/portieris/custom-resource-definitions.yaml 0xc42000e580 0xc42000e890 23695199 false}
for: "/tmp/portieris/custom-resource-definitions.yaml": customresourcedefinitions.apiextensions.k8s.io "imagepolicies.securityenforcement.admission.cloud.ibm.com" is forbidden: User "system:serviceaccount:portieris:portieris" cannot patch resource "customresourcedefinitions" in API group "apiextensions.k8s.io" at the cluster scope
Error from server (Forbidden): error when applying patch:
{"metadata":{"annotations":{},"namespace":""},"spec":{}}
to:
&{0xc4209e6300 0xc420d66af0 clusterimagepolicies.securityenforcement.admission.cloud.ibm.com /tmp/portieris/custom-resource-definitions.yaml 0xc42008cc50 0xc42008ce00 23695201 false}
for: "/tmp/portieris/custom-resource-definitions.yaml": customresourcedefinitions.apiextensions.k8s.io "clusterimagepolicies.securityenforcement.admission.cloud.ibm.com" is forbidden: User "system:serviceaccount:portieris:portieris" cannot patch resource "customresourcedefinitions" in API group "apiextensions.k8s.io" at the cluster scope

What should have happened differently?

The fix which is provided in portieris for the above issue where patch permission is given to imagepolicies and clusterimagepolices didn't work.

How can it be reproduced?

Deploy the pods

Any other relevant information

After providing patch permission to customresourcedefinitions , portieris pod deployment worked. Do you see any issue with this particular fix?