Drift-detection field-coverage gap - does cub-scout catch every drift?

A repository document, rendered for the site. View source markdown.

Generated at: 2026-07-30T12:38:02.000Z UTC · source: committed helm-expt evidence for this rendered repository document.

UNOFFICIAL/EXPERIMENTAL. Live receipt generated by scripts/run-drift-detection-gap.mjs; do not hand-edit. Regenerate with npm run drift-gap:proof.

Claim. cub-scout compare three-way --dry-from detects desired-vs-live drift (replicas/image, with cause attribution manual-edit) - but it MISSES a container env-var change. A Deployment whose env is drifted on the live cluster is reported as AGREED / 0 mismatches. Drift detection works but has incomplete field coverage: a real drift can pass as no-drift.

The day-1 drift claim: cub-scout compare three-way --dry-from <renderedDir> flags desired-vs-live drift. It works - but field coverage matters. Proven live on a throwaway kind cluster with two Deployments, each drifted a different way:

DriftConfirmed livecub-scout detected?Expected
spec.replicas 1→3-yesdetected
container env FOO bar→DRIFTEDyesnodetected

Overall: watch. Confirmed: cub-scout detected the replicas drift but MISSED the env-var drift (live env change verified). Drift detection has a field-coverage hole - extend it to container env (and audit other pod-spec fields), or a drifted env passes as no-drift.