Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 2 Apr 2006 15:38:08 -0400
From:      Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org>
To:        "Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@hub.org>
Cc:        freebsd-stable@freebsd.org, Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org>
Subject:   Re: [FreeBSD 6] semctl broken compared to 4-STABLE ...
Message-ID:  <20060402193808.GA57127@xor.obsecurity.org>
In-Reply-To: <20060402162612.N947@ganymede.hub.org>
References:  <20060402144704.S947@ganymede.hub.org> <20060402191519.GA56599@xor.obsecurity.org> <20060402162612.N947@ganymede.hub.org>

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

--+QahgC5+KEYLbs62
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Sun, Apr 02, 2006 at 04:32:31PM -0300, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> On Sun, 2 Apr 2006, Kris Kennaway wrote:
>=20
> >On Sun, Apr 02, 2006 at 02:55:39PM -0300, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> >>
> >>Back in April '05, someone posted a thread about PostgreSQL within Free=
BSD
> >>jails:
> >>
> >>http://unix.derkeiler.com/Mailing-Lists/FreeBSD/stable/2005-04/0837.html
> >>
> >>At the time (and to date) I reported that I was running several Postgre=
SQL
> >>daemons, all on the same port, using FreeBSD 4.x, and all within a jail
> >>each ... and I continue to do this without any problems ...
> >>
> >>Today, on our new FreeBSD 6.x machine, I am now experiencing the same
> >>problem that Alexander originally reported ...
> >>
> >>Its not PostgreSQL related ... I'm running 4x7.4 servers on a FreeBSD 4=
.x
> >>box, all on the same port ... here, I'm trying to run 2x7.4 servers on a
> >>FreeBSD RELENG_6 box ...
> >>
> >>So, something has changed with FreeBSD 6's (and, according to the above
> >>thread, 5's) use of shared memory and semaphores that is breaking the
> >>ability to do this ... something that did work as hoped in FreeBSD 4 ...
> >
> >See jail(8)?
>=20
> If you are referring to:
>=20
>      security.jail.sysvipc_allowed
>           This MIB entry determines whether or not processes within a jail
>           have access to System V IPC primitives.  In the current jail=20
>           imple-
>           mentation, System V primitives share a single namespace across =
the
>           host and jail environments, meaning that processes within a jail
>           would be able to communicate with (and potentially interfere wi=
th)
>           processes outside of the jail, and in other jails.  As such, th=
is
>           functionality is disabled by default, but can be enabled by=20
>           setting
>           this MIB entry to 1.
>=20
> That wording hasn't changed since FreeBSD4.x, so you are saying that=20
> FreeBSD6.x has become *less* stable/secure in this regard then FreeBSD 4.=
x=20
> was?  Seems an odd direction to go ...

No, as you say the wording hasn't changed: "meaning that processes
within a jail would be able to communicate with (and potentially
interfere with) processes outside of the jail, and in other jails.".
It looks like your postgresql's are doing this.

Kris


--+QahgC5+KEYLbs62
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (FreeBSD)

iD8DBQFEMCggWry0BWjoQKURAiGGAJ4s2UMoFKLQltvXBotbiWWZ2iYKtgCg1LCW
KzTMN33my4gThNsVlXGAkzw=
=t9aY
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--+QahgC5+KEYLbs62--



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20060402193808.GA57127>