Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 6 Jan 2002 06:27:14 -0800
From:      "Philip J. Koenig" <pjklist@ekahuna.com>
To:        stable@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Chrooted bind  out of the box
Message-ID:  <3C37EE42.10148.1C33477@localhost>
In-Reply-To: <bulk.39085.20020105235149@hub.freebsd.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> Date: Sat, 5 Jan 2002 22:26:01 -0500
> From: Joe Abley <jabley@automagic.org>
> 
> On Sat, Jan 05, 2002 at 02:08:46PM -0800, Crist J. Clark wrote:
> > On Sat, Jan 05, 2002 at 11:26:00AM +0500, Haikal Saadh wrote:
> > > Is there a reason why bind is run as root by default and not bind.bind?
> > > And not chrooted?
> > > 
> > > If I'm not mistaken almost everyone does this anyway, right?
> > 
> > IIRC, the last time it was discussed, it was felt changing this in the
> > middle of -STABLE would be too disruptive. Many working BIND
> > installations would break when people updated.
> 
> Why not create a named_chroot variable in defaults/rc.conf which
> is by default set to NO, but which sysinstall can override in
> /etc/rc.conf with a YES for fresh (non-upgrade) installs?


I think such a thing is a fine idea.  I went through a lot of anguish 
getting my chrooted version of Bind9 working. (and I'm even using the 
-t option, which makes it much easier than the traditional way.)

I'm told FreeBSD's 'jail' feature is even more secure than 
traditional chroot -- would be kind of logical to use that facility 
if it's going to be pre-configured.

One other thing which I guess comes up periodically but I keep 
wishing for - some pre-built statically compiled version of Bash that 
could then become root's default shell (ie when booting single-user) 
would be a great boon. (and which stays current with other library 
updates etc.  The main reasons I don't bother doing it myself are 
because I know I'd never keep it updated or feel up to re-doing it on 
each machine I put together.)

Apparently there is some problem with bash being incorporated in the 
base system because it's GPL I think.  Nonetheless, I think there 
might be some creative alternatives - like a port configured to 
compile statically which installs in /bin. (although you'd have to 
manually upgrade it periodically to keep it up to date with various 
libraries I guess)

Waitasec.. does this line in /usr/ports/shells/bash2/Makefile mean 
that by default it's configured to statically-compile?

CONFIGURE_ENV=  LDFLAGS=-static


I didn't think that was the default..


Phil



--
Philip J. Koenig                                       pjklist@ekahuna.com
Electric Kahuna Systems -- Computers & Communications for the New Millenium


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3C37EE42.10148.1C33477>