----- Original Message ----- > From: "Sam Kottler" <skottler@xxxxxxxxxx> > To: "Fedora Cloud SIG" <cloud@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Sent: Wednesday, September 11, 2013 8:53:59 AM > Subject: Re: Disabling firewalld on AWS? > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Michael Hampton" <error@xxxxxxxxxx> > > To: cloud@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > Sent: Wednesday, September 11, 2013 8:47:23 AM > > Subject: Re: Disabling firewalld on AWS? > > > > > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > > Hash: SHA1 > > > > On 09/11/2013 08:13 AM, Sam Kottler wrote: > > > On 09/10/2013 11:36 PM, Sam Kottler wrote: > > >>>>>> Given the deny-by-default nature of security groups I think > > >>>>>> it makes sense to disable firewalld in the AMI's. I haven't > > >>>>>> seen any other AMI's that have a firewall enabled by default > > >>>>>> and we probably shouldn't break that pattern IMO. > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> Thoughts? > > >>>>>> > > >>> > > >>> This is easily one of my least-favorite "features" of certain > > >>> Linux distributions. > > >>> > > >>> Debian/Ubuntu images don't have a firewall enabled by default in > > >>> their cloud images because they don't have a firewall enabled at > > >>> all in a default installation. At least the last time I looked at > > >>> them; maybe they've gotten smarter in the last couple of years. > > >>> > > >>> I'm not really sure I see a benefit here. There may not even be a > > >>> second firewall in front of the virtual machine; a user might turn > > >>> it off because it's getting in the way, or a cloud provider might > > >>> not provide this feature at all. I know of at least one public > > >>> cloud provider which has an external firewall feature similar to > > >>> AWS security groups, but it's off by default. In this case I see > > >>> plenty of downside. > > >>> > > >>>> If people disable their firewall then that's their prerogative, > > >>>> but it's confusing and non-standard to have a firewall running on > > >>>> the instance and one running via the security group(s) that the > > >>>> host is in. > > >> > > >> Also, I don't trust the public cloud providers to configure their > > >> firewall correctly. > > > > > > So in your case you just `chkconfig firewalld on` and configure it. I'm > > > sure that people who share your opinion (myself among them) will do that > > > for the extra layer of security, but I'm just advocating for the Fedora > > > images to follow the way other AMI's are handling firewalls. > > > > And I'm saying that the way other AMIs do it is wrong. We should not also > > be > > wrong merely because everyone else is jumping off the cliff. Rather we > > should continue to be secure by default and require explicit action from > > the > > user to disable security, not explicit action to enable security. > > It's not "disabl[ing] security", security groups already do that for you. Sorry, this was a weird sentence. My point is that having rules in place on the instance isn't enabling security, but rather adding another layer of it. > You're adding an extra convoluted layer, and the vast majority of users will > just disable it and rely on security groups (that's conjecture on my part). > Have you ever heard about vulnerabilities in the AWS security group > implementation? I haven't. > > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > > Version: GnuPG v1.4.14 (GNU/Linux) > > Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org > > Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ > > > > iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJSMGZbAAoJEJICkBIKCqxcZU8P/2l2+3RP57++Emwl3sfcg0TN > > 7a1pFT58OxQXUYeUuB/rNtIMOsr2hKsk9RzbJkB4Hlq4IE3d1X87IZ6IGU5IdAKL > > 0h4gxkV9yCSg0D9v7QIJbHjSPtyQS/A4xX2LGwoO5uJRkIok8c3SZnwVUni/50+l > > CYnIHVo7jHax6nFtoeRKlbEFajq4BLkjepDKd9O+U8cilWIUiE7/U7x7SXz+gM7m > > fOfgR1HJ/vvWwyt40BwVKCi94Nn3MRNooevfP2Shh9QQuaMWXe94FnqMAb4aQ0qZ > > bCdIzDzIzZxX5kVGj01RlFHJps35Y091aGehnyFMvecf6zglks7KBLKFnEE5au3Z > > a9MAzvf7Ey6pli8X8F16ghPKYyLgggBu8Df/F9fY17rY0eFLe3f2Uhmr9y/J6sSf > > LVkBuYKvYBprMntMs50WdOOv/T3Xgnf0NjfCqzeOb+8F7IiXiOh50nGupMhjMY2H > > hcGA3b1YUESuzXHWV0LR7N4Z1owfF5PpNXZZrs7V6O/vCHDh2trmL0Pd/GOh0Co4 > > LbukaX3kFW4IS7EtTrdZC6zLH7QNpWNvLAsVCGeMP45F/jTugv+nigM83wCr3kJo > > wjitcI+7I0h3OWQTiA+yJXLYiVz/yneZcUKR9ikzPdGfWVsilAEWzsnNFYp+BgWK > > OgO8367gE4NY68rvSw5E > > =oAh5 > > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > > > > _______________________________________________ > > cloud mailing list > > cloud@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/cloud > > Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct > > _______________________________________________ cloud mailing list cloud@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/cloud Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
