Remove runtime config logic

[jeniawhite]

What does this PR do?
Removes the runtime config logic

Checklist

• I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works
• I have added the necessary README/documentation (if appropriate)
• TODO: Need to bump the policy version prior to merging this PR

[mergify]

This pull request does not have a backport label. Could you fix it @jeniawhite? 🙏
To fixup this pull request, you need to add the backport labels for the needed
branches, such as:

• backport-v./d./d./d is the label to automatically backport to the 8./d branch. /d is the digit
  NOTE: backport-skip has been added to this pull request.

[github-actions]

Cloudbeat CI 🤖

Allure Report: http://csp-allure-reports.s3.amazonaws.com/allure_reports/cloudbeat/prs/597/index.html

[oren-zohar]

looking at the new config.v1 format, it seems like we moved the credentials to there also, yet we still read our credentials from the flat version. Not sure if we should also address this change here, to fully migrate to the new format wdyt? nvm out of scope

Also, did you test this E2E? @jeniawhite

[oren-zohar]

I feel like the validation inside config should be here

if c.Benchmark != "" {
if !isSupportedBenchmark(c.Benchmark) {
	return c, ErrBenchmarkNotSupported
	}
}

[jeniawhite]

I've considered moving the validation to the validator but that would require us to move logic from the config package to the beater package.
Which requires recoding parts of the cloudbeat like newCloudbeat signatures and etc...
Reconsidering the existing solution I did not see any value in the validator, because we use the same validation for non-fleet managed configs and reconfigurations.
This is why I've consolidated the validity checks in the config constructor and removed the validator.

Would be great to get your input on that @amirbenun.

[jeniawhite]

@oren-zohar
Yeah, I've run the E2E test once again after removing the validator and consolidating logic inside the config and I can see the same amount of findings as the 8.7 SNAPSHOT without my changes.

[amirbenun]

IMO, we should keep decoupling cloudbeat and the launcher.
For that PR, it means that the validator should remain as an abstraction layer for beater specific use cases. Even if the validator only calls another validation function for the config.

[mergify]

This pull request is now in conflicts. Could you fix it? 🙏
To fixup this pull request, you can check out it locally. See documentation: https://help.github.com/articles/checking-out-pull-requests-locally/

git fetch upstream
git checkout -b evgb-RemoveRuntimeConfig upstream/evgb-RemoveRuntimeConfig
git merge upstream/main
git push upstream evgb-RemoveRuntimeConfig

[jeniawhite]

@amirbenun Rolled back to the commit that leaves the validator.
I Ran an E2E test again to verify that I get everything:

[amirbenun]

LGTM

[amirbenun]

I am missing some context here, did we change all the rules in a way they will run only when their benchmark is on?

[amirbenun]

I guess that's your matching change for the rules?