# A Step Closer to in-Toto'lly Secure: Using in-toto and OPA Gatekeeper

Source: https://www.testifysec.com/blog/in-toto-opa-gatekeeper

Author: John Kjell

Published: 2024-04-16

End-to-end flow for verifying artifact integrity using in-toto attestations and policy enforcement with OPA Gatekeeper in Kubernetes environments.

From the event archive

This is an event archive. Product names, affiliations, and demonstrations reflect the recording, not the current release. The overview is editorial context, not a transcript or a product support commitment.

- [Current TestifySec docs →](https://www.testifysec.com/docs)
- [Trust architecture →](https://www.testifysec.com/docs/cilock/trust)

## Watch the recording

The player loads from YouTube when you choose to play.

[Open the recording at its source ↗](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b_ImE70Vhd8)

Published by The Linux Foundation. The source is authoritative for the recording title, date, and participants.

## Questions to take into the discussion

- Carrying build evidence to an admission decision.
- The roles of attestation verification and OPA Gatekeeper.
- Artifact binding, policy, and trusted producers.

Use these as an editorial guide while watching or exploring the topic. They are not quotations or a verified transcript of the session.

## Apply the ideas to a current workflow

For an implementation, start with the [shared documentation](https://www.testifysec.com/docs). CI/lock captures the work, Pushgate checks the push, and the platform manages gates and technical control evidence. Check the [support matrix](https://www.testifysec.com/docs/concepts/support-matrix) for the release and environment you intend to use.

A signed statement can establish attribution and detect alteration under a configured trust model. It does not establish that the producer reported honestly or that a whole compliance framework is satisfied. The [trust architecture](https://www.testifysec.com/docs/cilock/trust) explains those boundaries.