Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2009 21:42:20 +0300 From: Edwin Shao <edwin.shao@gmail.com> To: Jamie Gritton <jamie@freebsd.org> Cc: "Bjoern A. Zeeb" <bzeeb-lists@lists.zabbadoz.net>, freebsd-jail@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Tutorial for Hierarchical Jails? Message-ID: <cf8a6aa50910011142h1cdafe20ve5be1eac5baa626b@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <4AC18822.7020705@FreeBSD.org> References: <cf8a6aa50909280506g63030d9ft423c42e8c61700d@mail.gmail.com> <4AC0E5E6.1010700@FreeBSD.org> <cf8a6aa50909281045x47e58e99y92437ffa86c72846@mail.gmail.com> <20090928180731.M68375@maildrop.int.zabbadoz.net> <cf8a6aa50909281326t72701481ve6b2450e792cd104@mail.gmail.com> <4AC12798.8070308@FreeBSD.org> <cf8a6aa50909281707t726cab37ieec29ca21303ae45@mail.gmail.com> <4AC18822.7020705@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
The base system has allow_raw_sockets, the first level jail also has allow_raw_sockets and has the exact same configuration as the base system (I use puppet to manage config files.) I can't set allow_raw_sockets anyway for the second-level jail without manually invoking the jail command. On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 7:08 AM, Jamie Gritton <jamie@freebsd.org> wrote: > Does the base system have security.jail.allow_raw_sockets=1? You need to > have that, or set the jail's allow.raw_sockets. You can't set the jail's > permissions from within the jail itself. If you have multiple jail > levels, then both jails need to allow raw sockets - a jail can't allow a > child jail to do what it can't do itself. > > - Jamie > > > Edwin Shao wrote: > >> One other thing that is odd: hierarchical jails don't seem to inherit some >> sysctls such as allow_raw_socket. >> >> In the host (jail), rc.conf has jail_set_allow_raw_sockets="YES" and >> sysctl.conf has "security.jail.allow_raw_sockets=1", but no child jail can >> ping out: >> neko# ping google.com <http://google.com>; >> ping: socket: Operation not permitted >> >> What is happening in this case? >> Thank you for your time again. >> >> >> On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 12:16 AM, Jamie Gritton <jamie@freebsd.org<mailto: >> jamie@freebsd.org>> wrote: >> >> The sysctls not only don't get written to, they don't have any useful >> information to read either. They only describe the existence and format >> of the various jail parameters. Sorry, but there;s no way to set a >> default children.max parameter or inherit it from the parent. We've >> decided to set the default to the most secure/restrictive in many >> cases. >> Once we've come up with a new jail configuration interface, this won't >> be such a hassle. >> >> The devfs errors are probably something that will have to be addressed >> in a later revision - I haven't looked in the devfs direction so I'm >> not >> sure about that. The mount error may be related to the first jail's >> allow.mount parameter (whose default comes from >> security.jail.mount_allowed). >> >> - Jamie >> >> Edwin Shao wrote: >> >> Thanks, that worked for me. >> >> * Using jail to change children.max on the parent does not >> affect `sysctl security.jail.param.children.max` in the child. >> Also security.jail.param.children.cur never changes either. Not >> sure if that's intended behavior. >> * Is there any way to persist the >> security.jail.param.children.max parameter without entering the >> jail command every time? * I get the following output when I >> create a jail inside a jail: >> >> hyper ~> ezjail-admin start neko >> Configuring jails:. >> Starting jails:devfs rule: ioctl DEVFSIO_RGETNEXT: Operation not >> permitted >> devfs rule: ioctl DEVFSIO_RGETNEXT: Operation not permitted >> /etc/rc.d/jail: WARNING: devfs_set_ruleset: you must specify a >> ruleset number >> devfs rule: ioctl DEVFSIO_SAPPLY: Operation not permitted >> ln: log: Operation not permitted >> mount: proc : Operation not permitted >> neko. >> >> I'm using the same configuration values as in the parent's jail, >> which work. Everything seems to work alright inside the jail, so >> I assume the errors are safe to ignore? >> >> Thanks again! >> - Edwin >> >> On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 9:11 PM, Bjoern A. Zeeb >> <bzeeb-lists@lists.zabbadoz.net >> <mailto:bzeeb-lists@lists.zabbadoz.net> >> <mailto:bzeeb-lists@lists.zabbadoz.net >> <mailto:bzeeb-lists@lists.zabbadoz.net>>> wrote: >> >> On Mon, 28 Sep 2009, Edwin Shao wrote: >> >> Hi Jamie, >> When I try to change the parameter, nothing happens: >> rescue /etc> sudo sysctl security.jail.param.children.max=1 >> security.jail.param.children.max: 0 -> 0 >> >> rescue /etc> sudo sysctl security.jail.param.children.max >> security.jail.param.children.max: 0 >> >> Am I doing this incorrectly? >> >> >> Yes. It's a parameter to jail(8). The security.jail.param >> sysctls can >> be seen as a list of possible options valid to jail(8). See >> man 8 jail >> for the exact details. >> >> /bz >> >> -- Bjoern A. Zeeb What was I talking about and >> who are you again? >> >> >> >>
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?cf8a6aa50910011142h1cdafe20ve5be1eac5baa626b>