---

🧩 OPA vs. Kyverno: Which Kubernetes Policy Engine Should You Use?

In Kubernetes, policy engines are critical for enforcing governance, compliance, and best practices across clusters.

But with two major players — OPA (Open Policy Agent) and Kyverno — how do you choose the right one?

Let’s break down what they are, how they work, where they differ, and when to use each — from beginner-level clarity to advanced implementation insight.

---

📌 What is a Kubernetes Policy Engine?

A policy engine helps you define and enforce rules on:

• Who can do what
• What resources are allowed
• How resources must be configured
• Security, networking, labeling, and more

Think of it like a security gatekeeper + configuration enforcer for your cluster.

Example: Block any pod that doesn’t have resource limits defined.

---

🔍 What is OPA (Open Policy Agent)?

OPA is a general-purpose policy engine created by the Open Policy Agent project, widely adopted in the CNCF ecosystem.

OPA is:

• Highly flexible and powerful
• Designed to enforce policies in any system (not just Kubernetes)
• Used with Kubernetes via a component called Gatekeeper

✅ Key Features:

• Uses Rego, a purpose-built declarative policy language
• Integrates with Kubernetes, microservices, CI/CD, APIs
• Provides admission control via Gatekeeper
• Externalize logic from code/services

---

🔍 What is Kyverno?

Kyverno is a Kubernetes-native policy engine built specifically for clusters. Unlike OPA, Kyverno:

• Uses YAML-style policies
• Requires no separate language (like Rego)
• Is Kubernetes-first, not general-purpose

It was created by Nirmata and is also CNCF incubating.

✅ Key Features:

• Declarative policies using familiar Kubernetes YAML
• Native support for mutations, generation, and validations
• Great developer experience — no learning curve
• Tight RBAC and admission controller integration

---

🧱 Architecture Comparison

Feature	OPA/Gatekeeper	Kyverno
Language	Rego (new DSL)	YAML (familiar)
Scope	General-purpose (K8s, APIs, Terraform, etc.)	Kubernetes-native only
Mutation	❌ Not supported (validation-only)	✅ Supported (e.g., auto-labeling)
Generation	❌ Not supported	✅ Can create ConfigMaps, secrets, etc.
Community	Broad across tools	Focused around K8s
Learning Curve	Higher (Rego required)	Lower (YAML-based)
Tooling	Powerful query engine (OPA CLI, Conftest)	Tailored CLI & CRDs

---

✍️ Policy Syntax Examples

✅ Rego (OPA):

deny[msg] {
  input.kind == "Pod"
  not input.spec.containers[_].resources.limits
  msg := "Pod must have resource limits"
}

✅ Kyverno YAML:

apiVersion: kyverno.io/v1
kind: ClusterPolicy
metadata:
  name: require-resources
spec:
  validationFailureAction: enforce
  rules:
    - name: check-limits
      match:
        resources:
          kinds: ["Pod"]
      validate:
        message: "Pod must have resource limits"
        pattern:
          spec:
            containers:
              - resources:
                  limits:
                    memory: "?*"
                    cpu: "?*"

Kyverno feels much more like Kubernetes. OPA is more like programming a policy engine from scratch.

---

🛠️ Use Cases Comparison

Use Case	Better With OPA	Better With Kyverno
Multi-system policy (API, CI/CD, Terraform)	✅	❌
Kubernetes admission control	✅ (via Gatekeeper)	✅ (native)
Auto-labeling, mutations	❌	✅
Generating default resources	❌	✅
Complex logic / cross-resource analysis	✅	❌
Team without Rego expertise	❌	✅
Enterprise-scale flexibility	✅	✅
Fast implementation	❌	✅

---

🧠 Advanced Features to Consider

Feature	OPA/Gatekeeper	Kyverno
Custom Policies	Yes (Rego scripts)	Yes (YAML with variables)
Policy Exceptions	Via constraints	Via exceptions resource
External Data Lookups	Yes (with OPA extensions)	In progress (alpha)
Validation Modes	Dry-run, audit, enforce	Audit, enforce
Policy Templates	ConstraintTemplates	ClusterPolicy
Multi-tenancy support	Mature	Strong with namespaces/RBAC

---

📈 Real-World Adoption

Organization	What They Use
Netflix	OPA for API authorization, CI pipelines
Capital One	OPA for compliance
SUSE	Kyverno for auto-labeling, resource governance
CNCF Projects	Kyverno integration across ArgoCD, Flux

---

✅ When to Choose Kyverno

• You’re working exclusively with Kubernetes
• Your team prefers YAML and wants quick onboarding
• You need mutation and generation (e.g., inject sidecars, auto labels)
• You want out-of-the-box rules for common K8s best practices

📦 Bonus: Kyverno comes with policy sets for Pod Security Standards, CIS benchmarks, and multi-tenancy — easy to apply.

---

✅ When to Choose OPA/Gatekeeper

• You want cross-platform policy enforcement (K8s + APIs + Terraform)
• You’re comfortable with Rego or need advanced logic
• You need to query policy data programmatically
• You have large, enterprise-scale governance needs

📦 Bonus: Rego gives fine-grained, programmatic control for dynamic conditions.

---

🚀 The Hybrid Approach

Many teams use both:

• Kyverno for Kubernetes resource control
• OPA for broader governance and API security

They complement each other — not compete.

---

🏁 Final Thoughts

Question	Recommendation
Want fast, YAML-native K8s policies?	👉 Kyverno
Need full-blown logic + external integration?	👉 OPA/Gatekeeper
Managing multiple systems, not just K8s?	👉 OPA
Want to mutate or generate resources in K8s?	👉 Kyverno

In 2025 and beyond, policy as code is not optional — it’s foundational to secure, reliable, and scalable Kubernetes environments.

Choose the tool that fits your team skillset, use case, and platform scope.

---