Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 20 Aug 2018 18:22:11 +0200
From:      Stefan Bethke <stb@lassitu.de>
To:        "Bjoern A. Zeeb" <bzeeb-lists@lists.zabbadoz.net>
Cc:        FreeBSD Stable <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: Bind to port <1024 in jail
Message-ID:  <2FA29D2E-7C15-4C9D-A59B-98E9EA916891@lassitu.de>
In-Reply-To: <D9F9531F-6EB5-44F9-B8F3-523C0C2E0E44@lists.zabbadoz.net>
References:  <75536186-7D58-498C-BFC6-9284EB7CB444@lassitu.de> <D9F9531F-6EB5-44F9-B8F3-523C0C2E0E44@lists.zabbadoz.net>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help



> Am 20.08.2018 um 16:59 schrieb Bjoern A. Zeeb <bzeeb-lists@lists.zabbadoz.net>:
> 
> On 20 Aug 2018, at 14:47, Stefan Bethke wrote:
> 
>> I have a Go program (acme-dns) that wants to bind 53, 80, and 443, and I’d rather have it run as a non-privileged user.  The program doesn’t provide a facility to drop privs after binding the ports. I’m planning to run it in a jail.
>> 
>> After some googling, it appears that a couple of years ago I should have been able to do:
>> sysctl net.inet.ip.portrange.reservedhigh=0
>> and allow all processes to bind to „low“ ports. This does not work in my jails on a 11-stable host.
>> 
>> $ sudo sysctl net.inet.ip.portrange.reservedhigh=0
>> net.inet.ip.portrange.reservedhigh: 1023
>> sysctl: net.inet.ip.portrange.reservedhigh=0: Operation not permitted
>> 
>> Securelevel should not interfere:
>> $ sysctl kern.securelevel
>> kern.securelevel: -1
>> 
>> Is there a way to allow regular processes to bind to low ports?
> 
> you have to set it on the base system;  alternatively with vnet you might be able to change it per-jail.

Do you feel it’s OK to enable VIMAGE in -stable? When I tried last in 2016, I had stability issues, I think related to pf.


Stefan

-- 
Stefan Bethke <stb@lassitu.de>   Fon +49 151 14070811




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?2FA29D2E-7C15-4C9D-A59B-98E9EA916891>