A is correct. For an imported framework exposed through HPE AI Essentials, the authorization policy that controls access to the framework endpoint is placed in the istio-system namespace. The reason is architectural: access to the application is enforced at the Istio service-mesh and ingress layer, so the AuthorizationPolicy must be associated with the namespace where the relevant Istio gateway and policy enforcement context operate. The policy then limits which authenticated identities can reach the imported framework.

A user namespace is where many user-scoped workloads and resources run, but it is not the correct location for the ingress authorization policy in this workflow. The ezapp-system namespace contains platform application components and is not the documented target for this policy. Likewise, placing the policy only in the framework’s application namespace would not implement the HPE AI Essentials ingress authorization pattern described for imported frameworks.

Current Rev. 26.21 training also introduces AutoHelm and updated framework-import behavior, but it continues to treat access control as an Istio authorization-policy function rather than a GreenLake user-setting shortcut.

References/topics: Advanced HPE Compute Solutions, Rev. 26.21, Module 3 “Understanding and managing communications” and governance policies; HPE AI Essentials Software documentation, SSO/authorization for imported frameworks.